I

物流學碩士 學位論文

The Effects of Green Port Construction for

Improving the Port Competitiveness

Supervisor Hwan-Seong Kim

August 2011

Graduate School of Korea Maritime University

Department of Logistics

Wang Liru

II

物流學碩士 學位論文

The Effects of Green Port Construction for

Improving the Port Competitiveness

Supervisor

Prof Hwan-Seong Kim

By

Wang Liru

A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements

for the degree of

Master of Logistics

Department of Logistics

Graduate School of Korea Maritime University

August 2011

III

本 論文을 Wang Liru 의 物流學碩士 學位論文으로 認准함

委員長 郭圭錫 印

委 員 南奇燦 印

委 員 金煥成 印

2011 년 8월

한국해양대학교 대학원

IV

Acknowledgement

I sincerely would like to appreciate my supervisor Professor Kim

Hwan-Seong With his help and constant encouragement whether study or daily

life I successfully complete my master course in Department of Logistics His

strict academic attitude and enthusiasm deeply impressed me and helped me to

archive success in research and study

I am grateful to Professor Nam Ki-Chan Logistics System and

Transportation Planning Professor Kwak Kyu-Seok Port Logistics and Social

Engineering Professor Shin Jae-Yeong Management Science and Logistics

Information System They all helped me immeasurably in detailing comments

I also would like to thank to all the members of Logistic Automation Lab

for giving me a helpful active and comfortable environment Ms Jo Min-Ji Mr

Tran Ngoc Hoang Son Mr Lim Chang-Won Mr Tran Xuan Thuong Mr Park

U-Seok Ms Lee Myung-Hwa

I also would like to give special thanks to my parents for their love

supporting me all the time and Korean and Chinese friends for their friendliness

sharing and confidence Ms Jeong Eun-Sil Mr Kim Jong-Hak Mr Lim

Jin-Gang Mr Chen Chao Mr Miao Yu Ms Guan Xin Ms Tian Mingbo and so

on

Korea Maritime University Busan Korea

June 30th 2011

Wang Liru

V

The Effects of Green Port Construction for

Improving the Port Competitiveness

Wang Liru

Department of Logistics

Graduate School of Korea Maritime University 2011

Abstract

According to increase the economy development the global warming and the

environment pollution are the greatest problems in the world Since ltKyoto

protocolgt has been brought out in 1990 citizens pay more attention to climate

change and environment protection By the trend of environment protection port

department makes a great effort on green port construction against the pollution

The aim of this study is concerns with the effects of Green Port construction for

improving the port competitiveness First of all the definition of Green Port is

described and its main characteristics are shown by using four classifications

VI

Second the measure factors for Green Port construction is suggested by through

the previous literature reviews and an evaluation model is designed

To evaluate the Green Port construction the questionary survey for Green Port

specialists and port officers is achieved And the effect factors for Green Port

construction are obtained by using AHP(Analytic Hierarchy Process) method

Last the relationship between Green Port construction and port competitiveness is

verified by analyzing the effect factors Thus the port competitiveness would be

improved by construction of Green Port

VII

항만경쟁력 강화를 위한 그린포트 구축효과 분석

Wang Liru

물류시스템공학과

한국해양대학교 대학원

국문초록

2009 년 세계 경제 위기 이후 회복세로 바뀜에 의해 항만산업의 물동량이

증가하고 선박의 대형화 및 신속화가 점차 가속화됨에 따라 항만 시장도

경쟁이 치열할 것으로 전망되어진다

한편 교토의정서가 공식 발효됨에 따라 각국에서는 대기오염에 대한 관심이

증가되고 있으며 CO2 배출량에 대한 감축 목표를 설정할 정도로 대기오염을

방지하는 자구책을 강구하고 있다 이에 따라 항만에서도 그린포트로의

전환이 불가피한 실정이다

따라서 본 연구에서는 그린포트구축 활동을 항만의 경쟁력관점에서

고찰하여 각 특징을 분석한다 또한 전문가의 설문조사를 행하고 이에 대한

VIII

AHP 분석을 통하여 그린포트 구축 활동간의 우선순위를 도출하며 구축결과가

항만의 경쟁력에 어떠한 영향을 미칠 것인지를 고찰한다

IX

List of Figures

Figure 11 Research Process 4

Figure 21 Green Port appearance and basic definition 10

Figure 41 Green Port Competitiveness AHP model 38

X

List of Tables

Table 211 Objective of CO2 reduces in main countries 8

Table 221 4kinds Green Port construction promote directions 11

Table 231 Details of LALB Port Green Port Promotion Programs 13

Table 232 Short term and Long term Green Port Plans in Auckland Port 16

Table 233 Summary of the Main Port of Green Port Measures 21

Table 241 Green Port measures in port each department 23

Table 311 Prevention literature research results 27

Table 312 Literature research in Korean academia 28

Table 321 Main factor in the Pretentious Research 31

Table 421 Details of Level I and Level II values 40

Table 422 Comparison matrix of level I indicators 41

Table 423 Average random consistency indicator RI 42

Table 424 Indicator weights table of indicator system 45

Table 425 Evaluation value of many main ports 46

Table 426 Final evaluation value on main ports Green Port measures and

competitiveness 47

XI

CONTENT

Abstract V

List of Figures IX

List of Tables X

Chapter 1 Introduction 1

11 Research background and objective 1

12 Scope and structure of research 3

Chapter 2 Green Port Construction Situation 6

21 Green Port Construction Background 6

22 The Definition of Green Port 9

23 Green Port Construction Situation in major countries 12

24 Green Port Indicators Research 22

Chapter 3 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green Port

Construction 24

31 Port Competitiveness Literature Review 24

32 Port Competitiveness Development Tree 30

33 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green Port

Construction 32

Chapter 4 The Green Port Competitiveness Analysis 36

41 The Green Port Competitiveness Model by AHP 36

42 Green Port Competitiveness Analysis 38

XII

43 Results Analysis 47

Chapter 5 Conclusion 49

References 51

1

Chapter 1 Introduction

11 Research background and objective

The Kyoto Protocol is an international agreement linked to the United Nations

Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) The major feature of the

Kyoto Protocol is that it sets binding targets for 37 industrialized countries and the

European community for reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to fight

global warming These amounts will be lower an average of five per cent based on

1990 levels over the five-year period 2008-2012 The protocol was initially

adopted on 11 December 1997 in Japan but entered into force on 16 February

2005 As of July 2010 191 countries and states have signed and ratified the

protocol

2

After ltKyoto Protocolgt has brought out in 1997 more and more people put

their attention on environment pollution Rapid development in industry

department brings out air water soil noise and wildlife pollution and destruction

As the health development of economic alleviating environmental pollution and

restoring original ecology extremely necessary

Focus on the long-term and future development in the port many counties

government and ports authorities pay attentions on Green Port construction

In the short term C40 World Ports Climate Conference draws up some

adaptive plans among big cities and major ports The plans include the incentives

provided to green ship user cooperation among the C40 member ports

encouragement to develop and utilize the Alternative Maritime Power and so on

In EU Green Port major policies is prohibition the ship utilization on fuel

which sulfur content over 2 (after Jun2010 the limitation of sulfur content is

1) There are also Marco Polo I and Marco Polo II plans in EU In Marco Polo I

Modal Shift Action Catalyst Action and Common Learning Action are included

from 2003 to 2006 And after 2007 in Marco II Motorways of the Sea Action

Traffic Avoidance Actions and Rail Synergy are added

In US people pay more attention to developing the new technology for

reducing CO2 emission Such as power generator and renewable resources and

Northwest Ports Clean Air Strategy

3

Compared with other departments green policy in port department is explained

as green maritime and green shipping For example super-eco ship building and

Modal Shift promotion

The same aim to Hong Kong Ports AMP E-RTG hybrid truck bio-diesel

recycling energy CNG LNG and development are in utilization

ldquoGreen Growth Policyrdquo is the measure which brought out by the Korean

government Follow this strategy Korean port authority also takes out the ldquoGreen

Port building comprehensive planrdquo Furthermore low carbon self-sufficiency port

the disaster safety port eco-friendly port and resource recycling port are the

understandings on the Korean ldquoGreen Growth Policyrdquo

As the port support policies being changed port competitiveness factors are

changed Especially the importance degree of each factor has been changed a

lot The purpose of this study is explaining the competitiveness effects changed

which taking Green Port measures and programs port and give a better advice and

suggestion to Green Port construction

12 Scope and structure of research

The method to analysis the effects of Green Port construction for improving

port competitiveness is AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process)

4

And research process in this study is shown in ltFigure 1gt

ltFigure 1gt Research process

In chapter 1 research background and objective research method and process

are included And chapter 2 introduces the Green Port construction background

definition the Green Port construction situation in many countries and each

department introduction in Green Port construction The chapter 3 views the

literature on port competitiveness and obtains the influence factors used in this

study trend and relationship between port competitiveness The chapter 4 based

5

on the survey data and calculates each indicator importance degree by AHP

method and analysis the result Finally in chapter 5 the conclusion summary the

whole study by the result analysis

6

Chapter 2 Green Port Construction Situation

21 Green Port Construction Background

As the United Nations Secretary General has said the greatest challenge which

we are facing is environmental regulators It is a growing crisis with economic

health and safety food production security and other dimensions

The Kyoto Protocol is an international agreement linked to the United Nations

Framework Convention on Climate Change The major feature of the Kyoto

Protocol is that it sets binding targets for 37 industrialized countries and the

European community for reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to fight

global warming These amount to an average of five percent bellow 1990 level

over the five-year period 2008-2012

The protocol was initially adopted on 11 December 1997 in Japan but all of the

member countries entered into force on16 February 2005 The Kyoto Protocol

7

was adopted in Kyoto Japan on 11 December 1997 and entered into force on 16

February 2005 The detailed rules for the implementation of the Protocol were

adopted at COP 7 in Marrakesh in 2001 and are called the ldquoMarrakesh Accordsrdquo

Follow the ltKyoto Protocolgt several flexible mechanisms are allowed Such

as emissions trading the clean development mechanism (CDM) and joint

implementation The mechanisms allow AnnexⅠcounties to meet their GHG

emission limitations by purchasing GHG emission reductions credits from

elsewhere through financial exchanges projects that reduce emissions in

non-Annex Ⅰ countries or Annex Ⅰ countries with excess allowances The

mechanisms help stimulate green investment and help Parties meet their emission

targets in a cost-effective way

Therefore many countries take action on reducing the GHG discharge emission

For example increase the energy utilization efficiency develop the solar power

wind energy tidal energy and other clean energy in their industry The details

about objective of GHG emission reduction in main countries are displayed as the

following ltTable 1gt

8

ltTable 1gt Objective of CO2 reduce in main countries

Bench

mark of

Year

Objective

()

Absolute

quantity

()

Remark

EU 1990 20~30 -20~-30 Norway New Zealand 40 reducing

USA 2005 17 -3 Passed by House of Representatives

Japan 1990 25 -25 On the premise of attention with China

India

Korea 2020

(BAU) 30 mdashmdash

Discharge amount is up to 564million don

in estimation

China 2005 40~50 60~150

(2005) Each GDP

India 2005 20-25 mdashmdash With the developed countries

participation

Russia 1990 25 -25 Be neutral country

Norway 1990 30~40 -30~-40 mdashmdash

New

Zealand 1990 10~20 -10~ -20 mdashmdash

Austria 2000 5~25 -3~-11 mdashmdash

Canada 2003 20 -3 mdashmdash

Mexico 2002 50 mdashmdash With the developed countries

participation

South

Africa

2020

(BAU) 34 mdashmdash

With the developed countries

participation

Brazil 2020

(BAU) 36~39

-20

(2005) mdashmdash

(Korean Maritime Institute 20095)

9

22 The Definition of Green Port

As the global warming affecting in the world climate has been heavily changed

natural disaster frequently occurred natural resources depletion and supply

imbalance cause crisis to reach a high level For the purpose of getting away from

financial crisis and creating the new growth motivity the counties in the world

make more efforts on developing economic

Because of the realization of this global climate and environment crisis Korean

government had brought out the ldquoGreen Growth Policyrdquo And it made the ldquoGreen

Growth Policyrdquo be embodied and law-governed announced ldquoLow Carbon Green

Growth of the Basic Lawrdquo

In order to coordinate with this policy and law build up the ldquoGreen Growthrdquo

everyone make their efforts and reach ldquoGreen Growthrdquo in Korea each department

As a important industry department port authority also take activity to match the

national strategy of ldquoGreen Growthrdquo and draw up the plan on ldquoGreen Portrdquo

construction

However there isnrsquot a clear definition about the Green Port Korean Land

Transport and Maritime Ministry have explained the Green Port as follows Green

house gas Reducing Energy Effciencing Nature-friendly Port The explanation is

very easy to understand but from a professional point of view it not very

10

comprehensive and concrete So we have to understand the concept in the Green

Port Construction measures and programs There are about 4 kind explanation and

promotion programs in the Green Port Respectively the port which based on

green technology and green business creating new growth motive improving

living standards jumping in the ranks of the advanced port

ltFigure 2gt Green Port appearance and basic definition

In the Green Growth National Strategy Policy there are 10 pieces of policy

directions and 50 researches each department should choose the appropriate one

Follow these researches chose by port availability especially Low Carbon

11

Self-sufficiency Port The Disaster Safety Port Eco-friendly Port Resource

Recycling Port and in this study Green Port construction is a plan on

comprehensive and mix of 4kinds of Green Port Construction

Table 221 Four Promotions for Green Port Construction

Promotion Program

(Green Port type) Activities

Low-Carbon

Self-Sufficiency Port

Eco-friendly inland transportation system building

New renewable resources power equipment utilization

AMP LED utilization

The Disaster Safety

Port

Disaster Prevention environment infrastructure building

Disaster prediction and corresponding system utilization

Eco-Friendly Port Beauty the port by green park planting and so on

Provide eco-friendly port building programs

Resource Recycling

Port

Port waste (silt soil) effectively recycling system

Establish resource recycling port paragon

As table1 shown each type of Green Port has a separate emphasis

Eco-friendly inland transportation system which encourages utilizing rail canal

barge clean system reduces the truck application amount AMP means

Alternative Maritime Power supply system replaces with ship power generation

The Green Port construction in most of counties is the low-carbon self-sufficiency

12

port And in their construction maybe add a few other type promote director like

beauty the port by green park planting and so on

However in this study the Green Port concept is a comprehensive plan among

4 types not a specialization system

23 Green Port Construction Situation in major countries

After ltKyoto protocolgt having brought out each department began to take

affords on the reducing the GHG (greenhouse gas) emission In port department

the activities are embodied in the Green Port construction In this study many

major ports in US EU Japan and Korea are chose to explain for research

231 US

① LALB Port

In order to achieve to reduce marine pollutants standby and build clean port

LALB Port standby resource ministry and environment protection ministry

signed a 5year plan on clean standby action cooperation

This promotion business plan set a set of marine pollutants standby emission

limitation on the ship department from the statistics year 2006-2007 to 2010-2011

handling department heavy duty equipment truck department and so on Such as

13

in Green Port Technology construction department measures and programs are

shown in following Table

Table231 the details of LALB Port Green Port Promotion Programs

Promotion Program

Heavy Equipment Truck

Heavy Equipment

Replace and Update Aging Facilities

Substitute Fuels and Clean Fuel Incentives

Budgetary for the Development of Substitute Fuels

Marine Vessels Tugs

Ship Speed Reduction within the Port

Electrical supply of parking in the Berth

Use low-sulfur fuel (supplementary motor)

Handling Equipment

Air Quality Monitoring

Measure ambient air pollution levels in the vicinity of

the Port

Include a number of real-time air quality measurements

On the restrict situation of heavy equipment trucks and others vessels must to

be replaced and rebuilt in order to minimum the emission of NOx And the trucks

which donrsquot reach the regulate standard do not allowed to get in the port These

regulations will help their owner to replace and update trucks and also set up a

replacement plan to 16000 aging trucks make the replace done by 2012 As

foundation repaired the cargo owner must to pay an addition tax about 20ft 35$

40ft 79$

14

In the maritime department the speed reduction incentive took action in

Jan2005 When ship entry into the port boundary speed must be reduced under

20 miles 12kont At the beginning the effect of this plan is very clearly so the

limitation may be raised to 40mile And AMP (Alternative Maritime Power ) is

encouraged to be built and developed as to ship use their engine and get GHG

emission

② New York- New Jersey Port

The New York- New Jersey Port Authority brought out environment policy on

CO2 emission reduction The main concepts as following first reduce PX SOX

3 each year and CO2 5 Second ship must utilize sulfur-low fuel as a

obligation Third AMP is provided Forth modern the unloading and loading

equipment must be built Fifth promote trucks replacement Sixth reform the ship

engine Seventh invent 9 billion dollars in the following 10 years Eighth invent

to all hybrid equipment (325) Ninth install the hybrid truck in AMPT and

NYCT

③ Seattle Port

15

In Seattle Port Air Environment Maritime Improvement plan has been

accepted in 2005 The plan includes first set up Puget Sound Maritime Air

Forum and make one AMP provide services for two tour ships second change

the diesel hybrid equipment into electric utilization Third use bio-diesel and

diesel catalyst and reduce the emission Forth emphasize the standard and plan of

truck minimum the idling time

Seattle Port Tacoma Port and Vancouver made a assignment and promote

ldquoNorthwest Ports Clean Air Strategyrdquo

④ Auckland Port

Auckland Port set up the aging replacement plan in 2008 and invent 20 milion

dollars gas emission should reach the level And cargo transport system in port

hinterland port authority and Air environment management committee make

cooperation and give an incentive to truck which use new clean technology

Table232 Short term and Long term Green Port Plans in Auckland Port

16

17

232 EU

Rotterdam Port

As the biggest Port in EU Rotterdam Port takes more affords in reducing the

CO2 emission Main programs are low carbon footprint AMP and so on The

limitation of CO2 emission reduces down 50 of 1990 by 2025

In July 2008 the authority of Rotterdam port gave international cooperation

with other ports an extra boost by organizing the World Ports Climate Conference

During this conference the authority of Rotterdam discussed possible ways in

which ports and business could reduce air pollution and CO2 emissions The

proposals the authority of Rotterdam was set out in a declaration which was

supported by all 55 port cities attending the conference The conference resulted

in five projects to improve air quality and reduce CO2 emissions The authority of

Rotterdam is behind the project to further elaborate an Environmental Ship Index

The Rotterdam Climate Initiative is a joint venture with the municipality of

Rotterdam DCMR Environmental Protection Agency Rijnmond and Deltalinqs

Common goal is to halve CO2 emissions in the region by 2025 in comparison with

1990 levels In connection with the Rotterdam Climate Initiative the port works

on (together with DCMR and others) creating an infrastructure for the capture

18

transport and storage of CO2 A business case presented in the summer of 2008 is

now being elaborated into a business plan The business case concludes that

Rotterdam can begin in 2015 with the capture transport and underground storage

of five million tons of CO2 per annum This means that the basic infrastructure

will then be in place for further growth in capture and storage to twenty million

tons in 2025

In 2008 a start was made on the development of a sustainability index for

activities relating to the P for Planet (environment) In 2009 it will further expand

the index to cover the P for People and the P for Profit In the first phase of the

sustainability index CO2 footprint sustainable purchasing sustainable building

and sustainable land allocation will be covered

233 Japan

① Tacoma Port

In the Tacoma Port there are some programs on protecting the air water and

soil environment

In the air protection department ldquoNorthwest Ports Clean Air Strategyrdquo

ldquoGreen Gateway for Traderdquo and ldquoTruck Programrdquo had brought out to against air

pollution The concepts include using ultra-low sulfur diesel bio-diesel and other

cleaner-burning fuels in cargo-handling equipment using low-sulfur distillate

19

fuels at berth adding ldquogreen designrdquo environmental features to ships including

diesel-electric motors that save up to 30 percent in fuel and significantly reduce

emissions setting targets to change older less-efficient truck engines installing

anti-idling devices on rail-switching engines as well as partnering on other

innovative technological advance

The Port of Tacomarsquos four dockside rail yards move cargo quickly and

efficiently from container terminals They also reduce the number of trucks on

city streets and highways Each full train that leaves the Port represents 250 to 300

trucks not on our roads reducing roadway congestion and diesel emissions The

lowest emission route to ship cargo from Asia to the US Midwest is through the

Puget Sound according to the results of a study by Herbert Engineering released

in May 2009

And in the land protection program there are successful clean projects open

spaces and future habitat restoration In 2007 the Port purchased about 70 acres

of open space known as Juliarsquos Gulch and Storey Pit located between the

Tideflats and residential Northeast Tacoma Monitor water quality system is in

utilization in the water department in Tacoma Port

② Tokyo Port

In the Tokyo Port Green Port programs are almost similar with Tacoma Port

e-RTGC (Rubber Tired Gantry Crane) the barge between Tokyo and Yocohama

20

which shorten international maritime container cargo transportation land distance

super eco-shipbuilding technology dissemination and promotion green business

certification operation and shippers and logistics companies support cooperation

③ Osaka Port and Hakata Port

AMP electrical power equipment and solar power equipment are in utilization in

Osaka Port E-RTGC and solar power of refrigerated container are in utilization in

the Hakata Port

234 Korea

In Busan Port a set of Green Port took implementation such as LNG truck

E-RTGC equipment utilization eco-friendly transport means conversion (rail

canal barge) and GHG emission reduction obligation Table233

21

ltTable 233gt Summary of the Main Port of Green Port Measures

COUNTRY PORT MEASURES

US

LALB Port

Green flag AMP discharge gas reduction obligation

recommends use of alternative fuels and clean fuel

funding for the development of alternative fuels facilities

by new engine development instead of NOx emissions

green truck program (reduce70-80) low-sulfur fuel

utilization restore and revitalize the Los Cerritos

Wetlands

New York

Port

AMP modernized facilities utilization high speed hybrid

yard

Auckland

Port

Incentives on the new cleaning technology containers

transportation system

Seattle Port

AMP green ship membership Tier 4 level reducing PM

by 1994 level Smart Way program Northwest Ports

Clean Air Strategy

EU Rotterdam

Port

Clean engine (barge) green ship membership carbon

footprint calculation cruise ship which under port

authority change to use low-sulfur fuel low emission

engine development and utilization Green Award AMP

ship recycling incentives

Japan

Tokyo Port

RTGC (Rubber Tired Gantry Crane) apply for the barge

between Tokyo and Yocohama shorten international

maritime container cargo transportation land distance

super eco-shipbuilding technology dissemination and

promotion green business certification operation

shippers and logistics companies support cooperation

Osaka Port AMP electrical power equipment solar power equipment

Hakata Port E-RTGC solar power utilization in refrigerated container

Korea Busan Port

LNG truck E-RTGC eco-friendly transport means

conversion (rail canal barge) GHG emission reduction

obligation

22

24 Green Port Indicators Research

As the previous section list shown Green Port measures and programs are

substantially the same

When a ship entry in the port boundary from voyage many ports give a

incentive on shifting and utilizing sulfur-low fuel and reducing the speed under

20 miles when the ship berth in the port the alternative maritime power are

provided which replace its power generation

Next in the cargo unloading and loading department the same with above

utilization of sulfur-low fuel and electrical equipment are promoted and

eco-driving education to driver is necessary what speed is fuel fully burning and

emission minimum point

In the cargo transport department in other words truck department the

replacement on aging trucks is popular in many ports aging trucks are prohibited

close to port at the same time an incentive or support function are provided on

aging replacement The automated equipments are recommended to utilize in the

Green Port like hybrid yard tractor And a perfect plan on truck running also could

reduce the idling time and against the emission of CO2

The details reference the following Table 241

23

Table241 Green Port measures in port each department

Emission reduction programs

Ship

department

Shipping

in the

port

boundary

Obligation on the utilization of sulfur-low fuel

Reform ship engine and utilize hybrid

Speed reduce in the port entrance(a off-shore fee

incentive)

Off-shore AMP

Shift utilization system of clean fuel

Unloading and loading

department

Obligation on the utilization of sulfur-low fuel

Replace electrical equipment

Eco-driving

Truck department Hybrid yard tractor utilization

Promote aging truck replacement

Minimum the idling time

Others LED light in the Port

Develop renew and recycle resource energy

The Green Port measures in this study are e-RTGC AMP AGV Green Ship

certification system incentives on the new clean technology Green Flag(speed

reduction incentive)eco-friendly transport means conversion joint distribution

the cost on account of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction polities and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

The details and definition on each Green Port measure and the relationship with

Port Competitiveness will be expressed in next chapter

24

Chapter 3 The Relationship between Port

Competitiveness and Green Port Construction

31 Port Competitiveness Literature Review

Although past studies on port selection models have focused on port selection

made by port facilities port services port rates and charge and location

Murphy made a survey between 534 shipping companies and port authorities in

1989 and between 1850 shipping companies and port authorities in 1992

Comparing with other papers Murphys got a survey among more widely

objects In his paper port selection(port competitiveness) was seen to affected by

facilities situation appropriate pilotage max ship entrance probability the

25

capability of handling non-regular cargos whether to provide information of ship

nationality or not and port services level

In French model (1979) there are two factors affecting the port selection (port

competitiveness) endogenous factor and exogenous factor In endogenous factors

there are adequacy and physical plant condition of terminal facilities terminal rate

and charges frequency and geographic coverage of ship and freight services the

capacity of connecting to inland rails or transport net and the services provides for

the shipping or logistics And exogenous factors included the size and economic

capacity of hinterland as a source exports or market for imports national

economic situation trade policy and support established by government the

situation at home and abroad

The same as Frenchs paper in Paters paper in 1990 there are endogenous and

exogenous factors too In endogenous there are the services provides for the

shipping or logistics capacity of terminal facilities situation and condition of

facilities operation strategies established by port authority convenience to utilize

And the political situation at home and abroad social change economic factor

stabilized labor and capital However in 2004 there is a tremendous change in

Peters new paper There are four parts multi-modal process interface transport

modes infrastructure Multi-model Process part includes ship entrance rapid

speed and accuracy shipper and shipping companies reactive operation flexibility

Interface includes labor power information technology and so on And there are

26

ship calls frequency and amount of fleet factors in the transport modes part In the

infrastructure part includes port facility equipments and so on

Port facilities rates and charges services inland situation and social

circumstance factors affect the port selection and competitiveness a lot from the

research until 1992 by Murphy And in Lirn and Pater research 2003-2004 the

new and detail factors are shown to us

We can clearly see the contents in next table

27

Table 311 Prevention literature research results

Influence factors

French

(1979)

Endogenous

port facilities port rate and charges calls frequency port services

port connection with inland

Exogenous

economic size of hinterland national economic situation trade

policy home and abroad situation

Willingale

(1982)

voyage distance economy size entrance to port and route port

facilities max ship entrance probability port operation rates and

charges port authority scale of port

Slack

(1985)

cost of inland transportation port proximity ship demurrage

multi-transport

Peter

(1990)

Endogenous

port facilities condition of facilities operation strategies

convenience to utilize

Exogenous

political situation social change economic factor stabilized labor

and capital

UNCTAD

(1992)

port facilities services location level of financial industry

information communication system social circumstances economic

stability

Murphy

(1992)

facilities situation appropriate pilotage max ship entrance

probability the capability of handling non-regular cargos whether to

provide information of ship nationality or not port services level

Lirn

(2003-2004)

physical and technologic facilities geopolitical location port

operation and management shipping and terminal cost

Peter

(2004)

Multi-modal Process

ship entrance rapid speed and accuracy shipper and shipping

companies reactive operation flexibility

Interface labor and capital

Transport modes ship calls frequency and amount of fleet factors

28

And there are many experts and scholars research for the influence factors to

port selection and competitiveness in Korea The specific content follows table5

Table 312 Literature research in Korean academia

Influence factors

Jeon Il-su (1992) location facilities charges service level (EDI) terminal operation

port authority

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

( 1993 )

location facilities throughput charges service operation

situation

Kim Hak-so

(1993)

export shipping amount of annual cost of each ton of cargo

marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km of

cargo loading time

import marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km

of cargo amount of liner ship

Yeo Gi-tae (1996) location facilities throughput charge service operation situation

Ha Dong-u amp

Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

location facilities service level logistics charges environment of

logistics service

Yeo Gi-tae (1999) location facilities throughput charges service

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

throughput quay length yard area GNP

Kum Jong-su

(2001)

distance between port and cargo site terminal facilities service

the capacity of multi-transport capacity of cargo handling

administrative service rates and charges of inland transport

congestion

Yeo Gi-tae (2002) location throughput facilities service level

Kim Jin-gu (2002) port facilities location cargo amount rates and charges services

29

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005)

voyage degree to attract cargo cargo handling cost amount of

handling cargo connection to inland service reliability location

berth availability quay length feeder network depth

transshipment volumes cargo security profitability

offing degree to attract cargo berth availability cargo handling

cost transshipment volumes

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005)

cargo handling amount port facilities location rates and charges

level of service

Heo Yun-su

(2005)

port facilities rates and charges services marketing geopolitics

location economic and social circumstance

Kim Geun-seop

(2007)

port services facilities cargo handling amount location cost

productivity factor global factor

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) rates and charges services port characteristics

Many experts and scholars make a research on port selection and

competitiveness recently But the factors selection criteria are difference

Nevertheless the main factors are facilities services cost and so on

Therefore port competitiveness factors which chose in this study are port

facilities port services port rates and charges and social circumstance

However the main factors are not the whole factors any more more and more

detail factors and characteristic factors appearance Port selection and

competitiveness factors have changed And the development content is introduced

in next part

30

32 Port Competitiveness Development Tree

As mentioned above port facilities port rates and charges and port location are

the basic factors in the port selection and competitiveness

From the following table we can discover that first one facilities rates and

charges and location are the most important factor in port selection and

competitiveness second one the importance of social circumstance turns larger

inland connection is necessary all the time

Table 321 Main factor in the Pretentious Research

31

port facilities rates and

charges

inland

connection

social

circumstance location

French (1979) radic radic radic

Wiliingale (1982) radic radic

Slack (1985) radic

Pater (1990) radic radic

UNCTAD (1992) radic radic radic

Murphy(1992) radic

Jeon Il-su (1992) radic radic radic

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

(1993)

radic radic radic

Kim Hak-so

(1993) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1996) radic radic radic

Ha Dong-u

amp Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1998) radic radic radic

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

radic

Kum Jong-su

(2001) radic radic radic radic

Kim Jin-gu(2002) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(2002) radic radic

Lirn(2003-2004) radic radic radic

Pater(2004) radic

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005) radic radic radic

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005) radic radic radic

Heo Yun-su

(2005) radic radic radic radic

Kim Geun-seop

(2007) radic radic radic radic

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) radic

32

33 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green

Port Construction

Following the research above Port facilities rates and charges inland

connection and social circumstance are chose in this study port selection and

competitiveness department

e-RTGC Electric rubber tired gantry crane is a mobile gantry crane used for

stacking intermodal containers within the stacking areas of a container terminal

e-RTGC are used at container terminals and container storage yards to straddling

multiple lanes of railroad and container storage or when maximum storage

density in the container stack is desired

AMP is shorted for Alternative Marine Power and Itrsquos a facility which

provides the electric system in the land for ship which entry in the port The

facility can reduce emissions which ship get entrance in the port

AGV is a mobile robot that follows markers or wires in the floor or uses

vision or lasers They are most often used in industrial applications to move

materials around a manufacturing facility or a warehouse Automatic Guided

Vehicle systems work around-the-clock making continuous flow and just-in-time

delivery easier to achieve Application of the automatic guided vehicle has broade

33

ned during the late 20th century and they are no longer restricted to industrial

environments

The e-RTGC AMP and AGV are the new clean facilities and equipments in the

Green Port they donrsquot reduce the efficiency of handling cargo and they also

reduce the CO2 emission account

Green ship certification system if a ship utilizes clean and CO2 emission

reduction technology on the ship building adds equipment and management and

son on certification would be received And the port authority gives some

incentive and preferential treatment among 45 ports Such as a better schedule is

provided for green membership ship priority in handing cargo and discount on

entrance fee

Incentives on the new cleaning technology There are two expressions about

this measure one is that the port authority give a incentive to ship which have a

great utilization on the new cleaning technology and the other one is that

environment provide many incentives to the authority which utilize the new

cleaning technology in the port such as LED street lamp solar power cranes

Green flag The Green Flag incentive program was set up to encourage ships to

slow down in order to improve air quality The Green Flag program provides

approximately $2 million a year in discounts for vessel operators who slow their

ships to 12 knots (22kmh) or less within 20miles (32km) of the harbor

34

According to the Port the Green Flag program reduced air pollution by 600tons in

2007 and is expected to do better in 2008

All of Green ship certification system incentives on the new cleaning

technology and Green Flag are incentives provided for users of port and aimed at

reduce port rates and charges So the 3 measures belong to affect port rates and

charges

Eco-friendly transport means conversion Eco-friendly means of transport are

much accounted of green port for example railway discharge less GHG emission

than truck barge with a clean engine among the river and inshore canal

Joint distribution joint distribution is a collaborative system which port

provides among many logistics companies It can make the cargo handling speed

rapidly and reduce cargo storage time for CO2 emission reducing such as

refrigerated container In an addition it also makes the logistics companies

transport more efficient

Cost on amount of CO2 emission differenced from other port the cost on

amount of CO2 is included in the port cost The cost aims to reduce the CO2

emission directly

CO2 emission reduction policies compared with other traditional port Green

Port gives more cost discount and incentives but in an addition there are many

policies on CO2 emission restriction Such as aging trucks restrictions in inland

transport department ship entry speed reduced and fuel changed in the ship

35

department and so on Whether these restriction policies constrain port

development or not and the degree of these policies constrain port development

will be explain by the AHP results

Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors some ports in the

western countries are opened as a travel place for visitors so as to change the

polluted impress and raise the position in our heart

Cost on amount of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction policies and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors can affect the social

circumstance factor Whether these measures can or not improve the social

circumstance and port competitiveness we have to see the next calculation and

results

36

Chapter 4 The Green Port Competitiveness

Analysis

41 The Green Port Competitiveness Model by AHP

The AHP is one multi-criteria decision making method which has been

extensively applied to a variety of decision-making situations The multi-criteria

techniques are considered to be a promising framework for evaluation of

decision-making factors since they have the potential to take into account

conflicting multidimensional incommensurable and uncertain effects of

decisions explicitly

In order to apply the AHP method a hierarchical decision schema was

constructed by decomposing the decision problem into its decision elements

37

After that the importance or preferences of the decision elements are examined in

a pair-wise comparison to the elements in the hierarchy The parameters are

estimated using pair-wise comparisons between the importance of the attribute or

decision element in the function using data made by each responder Making

comparisons is a question of which of the two attributes is more import as well as

how much more important

Follow these theories the Green Port Competitiveness Model choose factors as

follow in port competitiveness factors part there are port facilities port rates and

charges inland connection social circumstance in Green Port construction part

there are e-RTGC AMP AGV green ship certification system green flag

incentives on the new cleaning technology eco-friendly transport means

conversion joint distribution CO2 emission reduction policies cost on amount of

CO2 emission beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

38

Figure 41 Green Port Competitiveness AHP model

Follow the Green Port Competitiveness AHP as shown we set a questionnaire

survey to many experts scholars working in logistics system area And we got 15

ones and 14 ones results are believable and integrated

42 Green Port Competitiveness Analysis

39

The key to construction of the factors which affects the port competitiveness

is to determine the conceptual model The selection of the factors directly affects

the evaluation of the result In order to ensure the accuracy objectivity and

practicality of evaluation results the following basic principles must be followed

when selecting factors systematic principles the principle of universal

comparability practical principle and goal-oriented principle In view of the

foregoing the competitiveness which affected by Green Port construction model

is made The analysis follows established principles of port competitiveness

evaluation taking into account the characteristics and functions of the port as well

as port facilities port services port rates and charges ship entrance inland

connection social circumstances and so on

(1) Port facilities

e-RTGC U11 AMP U12 AGV U13

(2) Port rates and charges

Green ship certification system U21 Incentives on the new clean

technology U22 Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

(3) Inland connection

Eco-friendly means of transport U31 Joint distribution U32

(4) Social circumstances

40

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41 CO2 emission reduction policies

U42 Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors U43

Table 421 Details of Level I and Level II values

Level I

indicators Symbol Level II indicators Symbol

Port facilities A1

e-RTGC U11

AMP U12

AGV U13

Port rates and

charges A2

Green ship certification system U21

Incentives on the new clean technology U22

Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

Inland

connection A3

Eco-friendly means of transport U31

Joint distribution U32

Social

circumstances A4

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41

CO2 emissions reduction policies U42

Beautiful environment construction in inner

harbors U43

41

I Determination of level I indicator weights

As the ports competitiveness evaluation indicators at this level are complex

and the elements are not easily quantified AHP is adopted to determine the

indicator weights with the basic steps as follows

(1) Establish a comparative judgment matrix The comparative judgment

matrix is obtained through comparing contributed proportion of multiple

indicators to the overall target by the judgment scale wherein the fuzzy

judgment number introduced is 1 3 5 7 and 9 and the reciprocal of

such number indicates the important degree of one element relatively to

another The results are shown in next table

Table 422 Comparison matrix of level I indicators

A1 A2 A3 A4

A1 1 15 13 3

A2 5 1 3 7

A3 3 13 1 5

A4 13 17 15 1

(2) Calculate the characteristic vector of the comparative judgment matrix

which refers to the weighted vector of the indicator The writer adopts

42

the geometric method to calculate the characteristic vector The

calculated result is as follows

ω=(012 0560 026 006)T λmax=418 It can be obtained from the table

RI=09 Wherein ω is the characteristic vector corresponding to the

maximum characteristic value λmax of the comparative judgment matrix

namely the weighted vector of the indicator RI is the average

consistency indicator as shown in following table

Table423 Average random consistency indicator RI

Matrix Order

RI

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

0 0 058 09 112 124 132 141

Matrix Order

RI

9 10 11 12 13 14 15

145 149 152 154 156 158 159

(3) Conduct consistency check on the comparative judgment matrix Adopt

the random consistency proportion CR to judge the consistency of the

comparative judgment matrix According to CI= (λmax -n)(n-1) and

CR=CIRI it can be obtained through calculation CR=007lt01 Thus

this comparative judgment matrix has a satisfactory consistency and the

indicator weight coefficient calculated through this matrix is acceptable

43

II Determination of level II indicator weights

The data at this level are the details of level Ⅰ indicator The judgment

matrix obtained through comparing multiple sub-indicators under Level Ⅰ

indicators is adopted to determine the weights of sub-indicators under each

indicator one by one The specific steps are as follows

(1) The experts score the weights within the given range To determine the

weights of several small indicators under the same big indicator it is

supposed that the score of small indicator ｋ under the indicator j made

by the expert i is Xijk wherein i=12n n is the total number of

experts ј=12m m is the total number of LevelⅡ indicator к

=12Oj Oj is the number of small indicators under the big indicator ј

іјк IJK LRC l I j k

(2) The credit rating of the expert і is l l =1 2 3 l =1 indicates this expert

is quite familiar with the evaluated contents l =2 indicator this expert is

44

with the evaluated contents l =3 indicates this expert is not quite familiar

with the evaluated contents yi1 is the=08 yi2 =05 and yi3=1

(3) The comprehensive evaluation score of small indicator l under the

indicator j is as follows

(4) The formula for normalization processing of indicator weights is as

follows and the absolute weight of the indicator set is marked as

q=(q1q2q11)

(5) Because of the same justification and principle we donrsquot give the detail

about the calculation The same with the level Ⅰ calculation we

manipulation data one by one and get 14 results And obtain the average

45

results by weighted average method The results detail as Table for the

final weights of Level-Ⅱ evaluation indicators

Above the calculation process and method are just one of data from the

questionable surveys In this study the final results are got from the

weighted average by the results of each questionable survey

The final results are shown as Table424

Table424 Indicator weights table of indicator system

Level I

indicators Weight LevelⅡ indicators

Relative

weight

Absolute

weight

Importance

percentage

Port Facilities

A1 02735

e-RTGC U11 05506 01506 1506

AMP U12 01648 00451 451

AGV U13 02826 00773 773

Port Rates and

Charges A2

02902

Green ship certification s

ystem U21 04724 01371 1371

Incentives on the new

clean technology U22 02871 00833 833

Green Flag (speed

reduction incentive)U23 02405 00698 698

Inland

connection A3

02865

Eco-friendly means of

transport U31 05942 01702 1702

Joint distribution U32 04058 01163 1163

Social

environmentA4 00863

Cost on amount of CO2

emission U41 03698 00319 319

CO2 emissions reduction

policies U42 02273 00196 196

Beautiful environment

construction in inner

harbors U43

04029 00348 348

46

III Case study

In the questionable survey we also got the mark of Green Port measures

evaluation value of many main ports such as Singapore Port Shanghai Port

Hongkong Port Busan Port LALB Port Rotterdam Port and Yocohama Port

The highest mark is 5 and lowest one is 1

Table425 Evaluation value of many main ports

Singapore

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

LALB

Port

Rotterdam

Port

Yocohama

Port

Port facilities 38000 36000 34000 38182 38000 42000 32000

Port rates and

charges 32000 36000 31000 35455 32000 39000 33000

Inland

connection 39000 34545 35000 29091 35000 45000 36000

Social

circumstance 42000 32727 41000 32000 38000 42727 36000

With the Green Port and Port competitiveness indicator weights results these

ports got the final evaluation value

47

Table426 Final evaluation value on main ports Green Port measures and

competitiveness

Rotterdam

Port

Singapore

Port

LALB

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

Yocohama

Port

394 345 330 330 319 318 317

43 Results Analysis

From the results table we can obtain the many results as following

① The main Green Port measures which are more important to improve port

competitiveness are Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system the indicator weights are 01702 01506 and

01371 among the 11 indicators

② In the Green Port construction Cost on amount of CO2 emission and CO2

emissions reduction policies are the restrictions indicators but the weight

of two indicators are not big 00319 and 00196 So effect on Green Port

construction to port competitiveness does have the weaken capacity but

not clearly strengthen more clearly Thus Green Port construction really

could improve the port competitiveness

48

③ In the case study traditional ports Rotterdam and Singapore Port give us

better examples on Green Port construction especially Rotterdam Port

④ Hongkong Busan and Yocohama Port all got a lower evaluation value

But in detail Hongkong and Yocohama Port got a lower on the port

facilities and rates and charges Busan Port got a higher on the port

facilities and rates and charges but a lower on the inland connection and

social circumstance

⑤ Shanghai Port doesnrsquot have Particular strength factors but the

comprehensive strength is not bad the same as LALB Port

49

Chapter 5 Conclusion

In this thesis the effects of Green Port construction for improving the port

competitiveness have been studied Under the definition of Green Port the

characteristics of Green Port and its effects has been shown by analysing the AHP

method which based on the questionary survey for Green Port specialists and port

officers

Follow the results of analysis on Green Port competitiveness AHP model

Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green ship certification system is

better for Green Port Construction welcome for shipping companies and citizens

who live around the port And in the analysis of Port competitiveness factors port

rates and charges always affects port competitiveness a lot As a trend inland

connection factor abstracts more attention of shipping companies

50

On the trend of port department each port should take a activity to adjust

strategy for improving its competitiveness Such as in the main ports evaluation

Busan port get a high value on port rates and charges and port facilities but as a

lower value on inland connection factor the final value is not as well as we look

forward In the evaluation of Singapore Port through it gets a lower value on rates

and charges higher value on inland connection and social circumstance causes the

final value are better So the Green Port Construction may be a trend in port

department

In the results of this thesis Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system are better solutions for Green Port Construction And

especially it can be verified that the port rates and charges always affects port

competitiveness Futhermore the investment for Green Port construction and its

effects have to be verified in the future

51

References

1 Hoyle B S and Smith J 1992 Transport and Development In Modern

transport geography edited by B S Hoyle R D Knowles (London Belhaven

Press)pp11-31

2 Beresford A K C De Souza A J R G and Pettit S J 2005 Stategic

development of liner shipping companies and terminal operators Ocean yearbook

19(Chicago 1L The University of Chicago Press) pp 732-750

3 Heaver T D 2002 Supply chain and logistics management implications for

liner shipping In The handbook of maritime economics and business edited by C

Grammenos (LondonLLP) pp 375-396

4 Park T E (2011) A Study on selection criteria of Green Port and evaluation of

major Korean port A masters thesis of graduate school of Incheon university

52

5 JeongBH (2009)Green port management policy directions in the green

growth era- The case of Gwangyang port in Republic of Korea Journal of Korea

Port Economic Association Vol25(3) p361-384

6 Lee J S Han N H(2009) A study on Green Port Revitalization According to

Air Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

7 Lee Y K Nan J W(2010)Green Logistics Policy Analysis and Implications

of Japan

8 Lee B S (2010)Tendency and Countermeasures on Green Logistics in Port

Logistics Company A masters thesis of graduate school of Korean Maritime

university

9 Lee J S (2009) A Study on Green Port Revitalization According to Air

Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

10 Zhang F Y Li Z Lu X J Yao X L(2008)Competitiveness of Inland

Ports Based on F-AHP

11 Port of Long Beach (2009) Green Port Policy wwwpolbcom

12 The port of Los Angeles wwwportoflosangelesorg

II

物流學碩士 學位論文

The Effects of Green Port Construction for

Improving the Port Competitiveness

Supervisor

Prof Hwan-Seong Kim

By

Wang Liru

A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements

for the degree of

Master of Logistics

Department of Logistics

Graduate School of Korea Maritime University

August 2011

III

本 論文을 Wang Liru 의 物流學碩士 學位論文으로 認准함

委員長 郭圭錫 印

委 員 南奇燦 印

委 員 金煥成 印

2011 년 8월

한국해양대학교 대학원

IV

Acknowledgement

I sincerely would like to appreciate my supervisor Professor Kim

Hwan-Seong With his help and constant encouragement whether study or daily

life I successfully complete my master course in Department of Logistics His

strict academic attitude and enthusiasm deeply impressed me and helped me to

archive success in research and study

I am grateful to Professor Nam Ki-Chan Logistics System and

Transportation Planning Professor Kwak Kyu-Seok Port Logistics and Social

Engineering Professor Shin Jae-Yeong Management Science and Logistics

Information System They all helped me immeasurably in detailing comments

I also would like to thank to all the members of Logistic Automation Lab

for giving me a helpful active and comfortable environment Ms Jo Min-Ji Mr

Tran Ngoc Hoang Son Mr Lim Chang-Won Mr Tran Xuan Thuong Mr Park

U-Seok Ms Lee Myung-Hwa

I also would like to give special thanks to my parents for their love

supporting me all the time and Korean and Chinese friends for their friendliness

sharing and confidence Ms Jeong Eun-Sil Mr Kim Jong-Hak Mr Lim

Jin-Gang Mr Chen Chao Mr Miao Yu Ms Guan Xin Ms Tian Mingbo and so

on

Korea Maritime University Busan Korea

June 30th 2011

Wang Liru

V

The Effects of Green Port Construction for

Improving the Port Competitiveness

Wang Liru

Department of Logistics

Graduate School of Korea Maritime University 2011

Abstract

According to increase the economy development the global warming and the

environment pollution are the greatest problems in the world Since ltKyoto

protocolgt has been brought out in 1990 citizens pay more attention to climate

change and environment protection By the trend of environment protection port

department makes a great effort on green port construction against the pollution

The aim of this study is concerns with the effects of Green Port construction for

improving the port competitiveness First of all the definition of Green Port is

described and its main characteristics are shown by using four classifications

VI

Second the measure factors for Green Port construction is suggested by through

the previous literature reviews and an evaluation model is designed

To evaluate the Green Port construction the questionary survey for Green Port

specialists and port officers is achieved And the effect factors for Green Port

construction are obtained by using AHP(Analytic Hierarchy Process) method

Last the relationship between Green Port construction and port competitiveness is

verified by analyzing the effect factors Thus the port competitiveness would be

improved by construction of Green Port

VII

항만경쟁력 강화를 위한 그린포트 구축효과 분석

Wang Liru

물류시스템공학과

한국해양대학교 대학원

국문초록

2009 년 세계 경제 위기 이후 회복세로 바뀜에 의해 항만산업의 물동량이

증가하고 선박의 대형화 및 신속화가 점차 가속화됨에 따라 항만 시장도

경쟁이 치열할 것으로 전망되어진다

한편 교토의정서가 공식 발효됨에 따라 각국에서는 대기오염에 대한 관심이

증가되고 있으며 CO2 배출량에 대한 감축 목표를 설정할 정도로 대기오염을

방지하는 자구책을 강구하고 있다 이에 따라 항만에서도 그린포트로의

전환이 불가피한 실정이다

따라서 본 연구에서는 그린포트구축 활동을 항만의 경쟁력관점에서

고찰하여 각 특징을 분석한다 또한 전문가의 설문조사를 행하고 이에 대한

VIII

AHP 분석을 통하여 그린포트 구축 활동간의 우선순위를 도출하며 구축결과가

항만의 경쟁력에 어떠한 영향을 미칠 것인지를 고찰한다

IX

List of Figures

Figure 11 Research Process 4

Figure 21 Green Port appearance and basic definition 10

Figure 41 Green Port Competitiveness AHP model 38

X

List of Tables

Table 211 Objective of CO2 reduces in main countries 8

Table 221 4kinds Green Port construction promote directions 11

Table 231 Details of LALB Port Green Port Promotion Programs 13

Table 232 Short term and Long term Green Port Plans in Auckland Port 16

Table 233 Summary of the Main Port of Green Port Measures 21

Table 241 Green Port measures in port each department 23

Table 311 Prevention literature research results 27

Table 312 Literature research in Korean academia 28

Table 321 Main factor in the Pretentious Research 31

Table 421 Details of Level I and Level II values 40

Table 422 Comparison matrix of level I indicators 41

Table 423 Average random consistency indicator RI 42

Table 424 Indicator weights table of indicator system 45

Table 425 Evaluation value of many main ports 46

Table 426 Final evaluation value on main ports Green Port measures and

competitiveness 47

XI

CONTENT

Abstract V

List of Figures IX

List of Tables X

Chapter 1 Introduction 1

11 Research background and objective 1

12 Scope and structure of research 3

Chapter 2 Green Port Construction Situation 6

21 Green Port Construction Background 6

22 The Definition of Green Port 9

23 Green Port Construction Situation in major countries 12

24 Green Port Indicators Research 22

Chapter 3 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green Port

Construction 24

31 Port Competitiveness Literature Review 24

32 Port Competitiveness Development Tree 30

33 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green Port

Construction 32

Chapter 4 The Green Port Competitiveness Analysis 36

41 The Green Port Competitiveness Model by AHP 36

42 Green Port Competitiveness Analysis 38

XII

43 Results Analysis 47

Chapter 5 Conclusion 49

References 51

1

Chapter 1 Introduction

11 Research background and objective

The Kyoto Protocol is an international agreement linked to the United Nations

Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) The major feature of the

Kyoto Protocol is that it sets binding targets for 37 industrialized countries and the

European community for reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to fight

global warming These amounts will be lower an average of five per cent based on

1990 levels over the five-year period 2008-2012 The protocol was initially

adopted on 11 December 1997 in Japan but entered into force on 16 February

2005 As of July 2010 191 countries and states have signed and ratified the

protocol

2

After ltKyoto Protocolgt has brought out in 1997 more and more people put

their attention on environment pollution Rapid development in industry

department brings out air water soil noise and wildlife pollution and destruction

As the health development of economic alleviating environmental pollution and

restoring original ecology extremely necessary

Focus on the long-term and future development in the port many counties

government and ports authorities pay attentions on Green Port construction

In the short term C40 World Ports Climate Conference draws up some

adaptive plans among big cities and major ports The plans include the incentives

provided to green ship user cooperation among the C40 member ports

encouragement to develop and utilize the Alternative Maritime Power and so on

In EU Green Port major policies is prohibition the ship utilization on fuel

which sulfur content over 2 (after Jun2010 the limitation of sulfur content is

1) There are also Marco Polo I and Marco Polo II plans in EU In Marco Polo I

Modal Shift Action Catalyst Action and Common Learning Action are included

from 2003 to 2006 And after 2007 in Marco II Motorways of the Sea Action

Traffic Avoidance Actions and Rail Synergy are added

In US people pay more attention to developing the new technology for

reducing CO2 emission Such as power generator and renewable resources and

Northwest Ports Clean Air Strategy

3

Compared with other departments green policy in port department is explained

as green maritime and green shipping For example super-eco ship building and

Modal Shift promotion

The same aim to Hong Kong Ports AMP E-RTG hybrid truck bio-diesel

recycling energy CNG LNG and development are in utilization

ldquoGreen Growth Policyrdquo is the measure which brought out by the Korean

government Follow this strategy Korean port authority also takes out the ldquoGreen

Port building comprehensive planrdquo Furthermore low carbon self-sufficiency port

the disaster safety port eco-friendly port and resource recycling port are the

understandings on the Korean ldquoGreen Growth Policyrdquo

As the port support policies being changed port competitiveness factors are

changed Especially the importance degree of each factor has been changed a

lot The purpose of this study is explaining the competitiveness effects changed

which taking Green Port measures and programs port and give a better advice and

suggestion to Green Port construction

12 Scope and structure of research

The method to analysis the effects of Green Port construction for improving

port competitiveness is AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process)

4

And research process in this study is shown in ltFigure 1gt

ltFigure 1gt Research process

In chapter 1 research background and objective research method and process

are included And chapter 2 introduces the Green Port construction background

definition the Green Port construction situation in many countries and each

department introduction in Green Port construction The chapter 3 views the

literature on port competitiveness and obtains the influence factors used in this

study trend and relationship between port competitiveness The chapter 4 based

5

on the survey data and calculates each indicator importance degree by AHP

method and analysis the result Finally in chapter 5 the conclusion summary the

whole study by the result analysis

6

Chapter 2 Green Port Construction Situation

21 Green Port Construction Background

As the United Nations Secretary General has said the greatest challenge which

we are facing is environmental regulators It is a growing crisis with economic

health and safety food production security and other dimensions

The Kyoto Protocol is an international agreement linked to the United Nations

Framework Convention on Climate Change The major feature of the Kyoto

Protocol is that it sets binding targets for 37 industrialized countries and the

European community for reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to fight

global warming These amount to an average of five percent bellow 1990 level

over the five-year period 2008-2012

The protocol was initially adopted on 11 December 1997 in Japan but all of the

member countries entered into force on16 February 2005 The Kyoto Protocol

7

was adopted in Kyoto Japan on 11 December 1997 and entered into force on 16

February 2005 The detailed rules for the implementation of the Protocol were

adopted at COP 7 in Marrakesh in 2001 and are called the ldquoMarrakesh Accordsrdquo

Follow the ltKyoto Protocolgt several flexible mechanisms are allowed Such

as emissions trading the clean development mechanism (CDM) and joint

implementation The mechanisms allow AnnexⅠcounties to meet their GHG

emission limitations by purchasing GHG emission reductions credits from

elsewhere through financial exchanges projects that reduce emissions in

non-Annex Ⅰ countries or Annex Ⅰ countries with excess allowances The

mechanisms help stimulate green investment and help Parties meet their emission

targets in a cost-effective way

Therefore many countries take action on reducing the GHG discharge emission

For example increase the energy utilization efficiency develop the solar power

wind energy tidal energy and other clean energy in their industry The details

about objective of GHG emission reduction in main countries are displayed as the

following ltTable 1gt

8

ltTable 1gt Objective of CO2 reduce in main countries

Bench

mark of

Year

Objective

()

Absolute

quantity

()

Remark

EU 1990 20~30 -20~-30 Norway New Zealand 40 reducing

USA 2005 17 -3 Passed by House of Representatives

Japan 1990 25 -25 On the premise of attention with China

India

Korea 2020

(BAU) 30 mdashmdash

Discharge amount is up to 564million don

in estimation

China 2005 40~50 60~150

(2005) Each GDP

India 2005 20-25 mdashmdash With the developed countries

participation

Russia 1990 25 -25 Be neutral country

Norway 1990 30~40 -30~-40 mdashmdash

New

Zealand 1990 10~20 -10~ -20 mdashmdash

Austria 2000 5~25 -3~-11 mdashmdash

Canada 2003 20 -3 mdashmdash

Mexico 2002 50 mdashmdash With the developed countries

participation

South

Africa

2020

(BAU) 34 mdashmdash

With the developed countries

participation

Brazil 2020

(BAU) 36~39

-20

(2005) mdashmdash

(Korean Maritime Institute 20095)

9

22 The Definition of Green Port

As the global warming affecting in the world climate has been heavily changed

natural disaster frequently occurred natural resources depletion and supply

imbalance cause crisis to reach a high level For the purpose of getting away from

financial crisis and creating the new growth motivity the counties in the world

make more efforts on developing economic

Because of the realization of this global climate and environment crisis Korean

government had brought out the ldquoGreen Growth Policyrdquo And it made the ldquoGreen

Growth Policyrdquo be embodied and law-governed announced ldquoLow Carbon Green

Growth of the Basic Lawrdquo

In order to coordinate with this policy and law build up the ldquoGreen Growthrdquo

everyone make their efforts and reach ldquoGreen Growthrdquo in Korea each department

As a important industry department port authority also take activity to match the

national strategy of ldquoGreen Growthrdquo and draw up the plan on ldquoGreen Portrdquo

construction

However there isnrsquot a clear definition about the Green Port Korean Land

Transport and Maritime Ministry have explained the Green Port as follows Green

house gas Reducing Energy Effciencing Nature-friendly Port The explanation is

very easy to understand but from a professional point of view it not very

10

comprehensive and concrete So we have to understand the concept in the Green

Port Construction measures and programs There are about 4 kind explanation and

promotion programs in the Green Port Respectively the port which based on

green technology and green business creating new growth motive improving

living standards jumping in the ranks of the advanced port

ltFigure 2gt Green Port appearance and basic definition

In the Green Growth National Strategy Policy there are 10 pieces of policy

directions and 50 researches each department should choose the appropriate one

Follow these researches chose by port availability especially Low Carbon

11

Self-sufficiency Port The Disaster Safety Port Eco-friendly Port Resource

Recycling Port and in this study Green Port construction is a plan on

comprehensive and mix of 4kinds of Green Port Construction

Table 221 Four Promotions for Green Port Construction

Promotion Program

(Green Port type) Activities

Low-Carbon

Self-Sufficiency Port

Eco-friendly inland transportation system building

New renewable resources power equipment utilization

AMP LED utilization

The Disaster Safety

Port

Disaster Prevention environment infrastructure building

Disaster prediction and corresponding system utilization

Eco-Friendly Port Beauty the port by green park planting and so on

Provide eco-friendly port building programs

Resource Recycling

Port

Port waste (silt soil) effectively recycling system

Establish resource recycling port paragon

As table1 shown each type of Green Port has a separate emphasis

Eco-friendly inland transportation system which encourages utilizing rail canal

barge clean system reduces the truck application amount AMP means

Alternative Maritime Power supply system replaces with ship power generation

The Green Port construction in most of counties is the low-carbon self-sufficiency

12

port And in their construction maybe add a few other type promote director like

beauty the port by green park planting and so on

However in this study the Green Port concept is a comprehensive plan among

4 types not a specialization system

23 Green Port Construction Situation in major countries

After ltKyoto protocolgt having brought out each department began to take

affords on the reducing the GHG (greenhouse gas) emission In port department

the activities are embodied in the Green Port construction In this study many

major ports in US EU Japan and Korea are chose to explain for research

231 US

① LALB Port

In order to achieve to reduce marine pollutants standby and build clean port

LALB Port standby resource ministry and environment protection ministry

signed a 5year plan on clean standby action cooperation

This promotion business plan set a set of marine pollutants standby emission

limitation on the ship department from the statistics year 2006-2007 to 2010-2011

handling department heavy duty equipment truck department and so on Such as

13

in Green Port Technology construction department measures and programs are

shown in following Table

Table231 the details of LALB Port Green Port Promotion Programs

Promotion Program

Heavy Equipment Truck

Heavy Equipment

Replace and Update Aging Facilities

Substitute Fuels and Clean Fuel Incentives

Budgetary for the Development of Substitute Fuels

Marine Vessels Tugs

Ship Speed Reduction within the Port

Electrical supply of parking in the Berth

Use low-sulfur fuel (supplementary motor)

Handling Equipment

Air Quality Monitoring

Measure ambient air pollution levels in the vicinity of

the Port

Include a number of real-time air quality measurements

On the restrict situation of heavy equipment trucks and others vessels must to

be replaced and rebuilt in order to minimum the emission of NOx And the trucks

which donrsquot reach the regulate standard do not allowed to get in the port These

regulations will help their owner to replace and update trucks and also set up a

replacement plan to 16000 aging trucks make the replace done by 2012 As

foundation repaired the cargo owner must to pay an addition tax about 20ft 35$

40ft 79$

14

In the maritime department the speed reduction incentive took action in

Jan2005 When ship entry into the port boundary speed must be reduced under

20 miles 12kont At the beginning the effect of this plan is very clearly so the

limitation may be raised to 40mile And AMP (Alternative Maritime Power ) is

encouraged to be built and developed as to ship use their engine and get GHG

emission

② New York- New Jersey Port

The New York- New Jersey Port Authority brought out environment policy on

CO2 emission reduction The main concepts as following first reduce PX SOX

3 each year and CO2 5 Second ship must utilize sulfur-low fuel as a

obligation Third AMP is provided Forth modern the unloading and loading

equipment must be built Fifth promote trucks replacement Sixth reform the ship

engine Seventh invent 9 billion dollars in the following 10 years Eighth invent

to all hybrid equipment (325) Ninth install the hybrid truck in AMPT and

NYCT

③ Seattle Port

15

In Seattle Port Air Environment Maritime Improvement plan has been

accepted in 2005 The plan includes first set up Puget Sound Maritime Air

Forum and make one AMP provide services for two tour ships second change

the diesel hybrid equipment into electric utilization Third use bio-diesel and

diesel catalyst and reduce the emission Forth emphasize the standard and plan of

truck minimum the idling time

Seattle Port Tacoma Port and Vancouver made a assignment and promote

ldquoNorthwest Ports Clean Air Strategyrdquo

④ Auckland Port

Auckland Port set up the aging replacement plan in 2008 and invent 20 milion

dollars gas emission should reach the level And cargo transport system in port

hinterland port authority and Air environment management committee make

cooperation and give an incentive to truck which use new clean technology

Table232 Short term and Long term Green Port Plans in Auckland Port

16

17

232 EU

Rotterdam Port

As the biggest Port in EU Rotterdam Port takes more affords in reducing the

CO2 emission Main programs are low carbon footprint AMP and so on The

limitation of CO2 emission reduces down 50 of 1990 by 2025

In July 2008 the authority of Rotterdam port gave international cooperation

with other ports an extra boost by organizing the World Ports Climate Conference

During this conference the authority of Rotterdam discussed possible ways in

which ports and business could reduce air pollution and CO2 emissions The

proposals the authority of Rotterdam was set out in a declaration which was

supported by all 55 port cities attending the conference The conference resulted

in five projects to improve air quality and reduce CO2 emissions The authority of

Rotterdam is behind the project to further elaborate an Environmental Ship Index

The Rotterdam Climate Initiative is a joint venture with the municipality of

Rotterdam DCMR Environmental Protection Agency Rijnmond and Deltalinqs

Common goal is to halve CO2 emissions in the region by 2025 in comparison with

1990 levels In connection with the Rotterdam Climate Initiative the port works

on (together with DCMR and others) creating an infrastructure for the capture

18

transport and storage of CO2 A business case presented in the summer of 2008 is

now being elaborated into a business plan The business case concludes that

Rotterdam can begin in 2015 with the capture transport and underground storage

of five million tons of CO2 per annum This means that the basic infrastructure

will then be in place for further growth in capture and storage to twenty million

tons in 2025

In 2008 a start was made on the development of a sustainability index for

activities relating to the P for Planet (environment) In 2009 it will further expand

the index to cover the P for People and the P for Profit In the first phase of the

sustainability index CO2 footprint sustainable purchasing sustainable building

and sustainable land allocation will be covered

233 Japan

① Tacoma Port

In the Tacoma Port there are some programs on protecting the air water and

soil environment

In the air protection department ldquoNorthwest Ports Clean Air Strategyrdquo

ldquoGreen Gateway for Traderdquo and ldquoTruck Programrdquo had brought out to against air

pollution The concepts include using ultra-low sulfur diesel bio-diesel and other

cleaner-burning fuels in cargo-handling equipment using low-sulfur distillate

19

fuels at berth adding ldquogreen designrdquo environmental features to ships including

diesel-electric motors that save up to 30 percent in fuel and significantly reduce

emissions setting targets to change older less-efficient truck engines installing

anti-idling devices on rail-switching engines as well as partnering on other

innovative technological advance

The Port of Tacomarsquos four dockside rail yards move cargo quickly and

efficiently from container terminals They also reduce the number of trucks on

city streets and highways Each full train that leaves the Port represents 250 to 300

trucks not on our roads reducing roadway congestion and diesel emissions The

lowest emission route to ship cargo from Asia to the US Midwest is through the

Puget Sound according to the results of a study by Herbert Engineering released

in May 2009

And in the land protection program there are successful clean projects open

spaces and future habitat restoration In 2007 the Port purchased about 70 acres

of open space known as Juliarsquos Gulch and Storey Pit located between the

Tideflats and residential Northeast Tacoma Monitor water quality system is in

utilization in the water department in Tacoma Port

② Tokyo Port

In the Tokyo Port Green Port programs are almost similar with Tacoma Port

e-RTGC (Rubber Tired Gantry Crane) the barge between Tokyo and Yocohama

20

which shorten international maritime container cargo transportation land distance

super eco-shipbuilding technology dissemination and promotion green business

certification operation and shippers and logistics companies support cooperation

③ Osaka Port and Hakata Port

AMP electrical power equipment and solar power equipment are in utilization in

Osaka Port E-RTGC and solar power of refrigerated container are in utilization in

the Hakata Port

234 Korea

In Busan Port a set of Green Port took implementation such as LNG truck

E-RTGC equipment utilization eco-friendly transport means conversion (rail

canal barge) and GHG emission reduction obligation Table233

21

ltTable 233gt Summary of the Main Port of Green Port Measures

COUNTRY PORT MEASURES

US

LALB Port

Green flag AMP discharge gas reduction obligation

recommends use of alternative fuels and clean fuel

funding for the development of alternative fuels facilities

by new engine development instead of NOx emissions

green truck program (reduce70-80) low-sulfur fuel

utilization restore and revitalize the Los Cerritos

Wetlands

New York

Port

AMP modernized facilities utilization high speed hybrid

yard

Auckland

Port

Incentives on the new cleaning technology containers

transportation system

Seattle Port

AMP green ship membership Tier 4 level reducing PM

by 1994 level Smart Way program Northwest Ports

Clean Air Strategy

EU Rotterdam

Port

Clean engine (barge) green ship membership carbon

footprint calculation cruise ship which under port

authority change to use low-sulfur fuel low emission

engine development and utilization Green Award AMP

ship recycling incentives

Japan

Tokyo Port

RTGC (Rubber Tired Gantry Crane) apply for the barge

between Tokyo and Yocohama shorten international

maritime container cargo transportation land distance

super eco-shipbuilding technology dissemination and

promotion green business certification operation

shippers and logistics companies support cooperation

Osaka Port AMP electrical power equipment solar power equipment

Hakata Port E-RTGC solar power utilization in refrigerated container

Korea Busan Port

LNG truck E-RTGC eco-friendly transport means

conversion (rail canal barge) GHG emission reduction

obligation

22

24 Green Port Indicators Research

As the previous section list shown Green Port measures and programs are

substantially the same

When a ship entry in the port boundary from voyage many ports give a

incentive on shifting and utilizing sulfur-low fuel and reducing the speed under

20 miles when the ship berth in the port the alternative maritime power are

provided which replace its power generation

Next in the cargo unloading and loading department the same with above

utilization of sulfur-low fuel and electrical equipment are promoted and

eco-driving education to driver is necessary what speed is fuel fully burning and

emission minimum point

In the cargo transport department in other words truck department the

replacement on aging trucks is popular in many ports aging trucks are prohibited

close to port at the same time an incentive or support function are provided on

aging replacement The automated equipments are recommended to utilize in the

Green Port like hybrid yard tractor And a perfect plan on truck running also could

reduce the idling time and against the emission of CO2

The details reference the following Table 241

23

Table241 Green Port measures in port each department

Emission reduction programs

Ship

department

Shipping

in the

port

boundary

Obligation on the utilization of sulfur-low fuel

Reform ship engine and utilize hybrid

Speed reduce in the port entrance(a off-shore fee

incentive)

Off-shore AMP

Shift utilization system of clean fuel

Unloading and loading

department

Obligation on the utilization of sulfur-low fuel

Replace electrical equipment

Eco-driving

Truck department Hybrid yard tractor utilization

Promote aging truck replacement

Minimum the idling time

Others LED light in the Port

Develop renew and recycle resource energy

The Green Port measures in this study are e-RTGC AMP AGV Green Ship

certification system incentives on the new clean technology Green Flag(speed

reduction incentive)eco-friendly transport means conversion joint distribution

the cost on account of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction polities and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

The details and definition on each Green Port measure and the relationship with

Port Competitiveness will be expressed in next chapter

24

Chapter 3 The Relationship between Port

Competitiveness and Green Port Construction

31 Port Competitiveness Literature Review

Although past studies on port selection models have focused on port selection

made by port facilities port services port rates and charge and location

Murphy made a survey between 534 shipping companies and port authorities in

1989 and between 1850 shipping companies and port authorities in 1992

Comparing with other papers Murphys got a survey among more widely

objects In his paper port selection(port competitiveness) was seen to affected by

facilities situation appropriate pilotage max ship entrance probability the

25

capability of handling non-regular cargos whether to provide information of ship

nationality or not and port services level

In French model (1979) there are two factors affecting the port selection (port

competitiveness) endogenous factor and exogenous factor In endogenous factors

there are adequacy and physical plant condition of terminal facilities terminal rate

and charges frequency and geographic coverage of ship and freight services the

capacity of connecting to inland rails or transport net and the services provides for

the shipping or logistics And exogenous factors included the size and economic

capacity of hinterland as a source exports or market for imports national

economic situation trade policy and support established by government the

situation at home and abroad

The same as Frenchs paper in Paters paper in 1990 there are endogenous and

exogenous factors too In endogenous there are the services provides for the

shipping or logistics capacity of terminal facilities situation and condition of

facilities operation strategies established by port authority convenience to utilize

And the political situation at home and abroad social change economic factor

stabilized labor and capital However in 2004 there is a tremendous change in

Peters new paper There are four parts multi-modal process interface transport

modes infrastructure Multi-model Process part includes ship entrance rapid

speed and accuracy shipper and shipping companies reactive operation flexibility

Interface includes labor power information technology and so on And there are

26

ship calls frequency and amount of fleet factors in the transport modes part In the

infrastructure part includes port facility equipments and so on

Port facilities rates and charges services inland situation and social

circumstance factors affect the port selection and competitiveness a lot from the

research until 1992 by Murphy And in Lirn and Pater research 2003-2004 the

new and detail factors are shown to us

We can clearly see the contents in next table

27

Table 311 Prevention literature research results

Influence factors

French

(1979)

Endogenous

port facilities port rate and charges calls frequency port services

port connection with inland

Exogenous

economic size of hinterland national economic situation trade

policy home and abroad situation

Willingale

(1982)

voyage distance economy size entrance to port and route port

facilities max ship entrance probability port operation rates and

charges port authority scale of port

Slack

(1985)

cost of inland transportation port proximity ship demurrage

multi-transport

Peter

(1990)

Endogenous

port facilities condition of facilities operation strategies

convenience to utilize

Exogenous

political situation social change economic factor stabilized labor

and capital

UNCTAD

(1992)

port facilities services location level of financial industry

information communication system social circumstances economic

stability

Murphy

(1992)

facilities situation appropriate pilotage max ship entrance

probability the capability of handling non-regular cargos whether to

provide information of ship nationality or not port services level

Lirn

(2003-2004)

physical and technologic facilities geopolitical location port

operation and management shipping and terminal cost

Peter

(2004)

Multi-modal Process

ship entrance rapid speed and accuracy shipper and shipping

companies reactive operation flexibility

Interface labor and capital

Transport modes ship calls frequency and amount of fleet factors

28

And there are many experts and scholars research for the influence factors to

port selection and competitiveness in Korea The specific content follows table5

Table 312 Literature research in Korean academia

Influence factors

Jeon Il-su (1992) location facilities charges service level (EDI) terminal operation

port authority

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

( 1993 )

location facilities throughput charges service operation

situation

Kim Hak-so

(1993)

export shipping amount of annual cost of each ton of cargo

marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km of

cargo loading time

import marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km

of cargo amount of liner ship

Yeo Gi-tae (1996) location facilities throughput charge service operation situation

Ha Dong-u amp

Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

location facilities service level logistics charges environment of

logistics service

Yeo Gi-tae (1999) location facilities throughput charges service

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

throughput quay length yard area GNP

Kum Jong-su

(2001)

distance between port and cargo site terminal facilities service

the capacity of multi-transport capacity of cargo handling

administrative service rates and charges of inland transport

congestion

Yeo Gi-tae (2002) location throughput facilities service level

Kim Jin-gu (2002) port facilities location cargo amount rates and charges services

29

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005)

voyage degree to attract cargo cargo handling cost amount of

handling cargo connection to inland service reliability location

berth availability quay length feeder network depth

transshipment volumes cargo security profitability

offing degree to attract cargo berth availability cargo handling

cost transshipment volumes

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005)

cargo handling amount port facilities location rates and charges

level of service

Heo Yun-su

(2005)

port facilities rates and charges services marketing geopolitics

location economic and social circumstance

Kim Geun-seop

(2007)

port services facilities cargo handling amount location cost

productivity factor global factor

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) rates and charges services port characteristics

Many experts and scholars make a research on port selection and

competitiveness recently But the factors selection criteria are difference

Nevertheless the main factors are facilities services cost and so on

Therefore port competitiveness factors which chose in this study are port

facilities port services port rates and charges and social circumstance

However the main factors are not the whole factors any more more and more

detail factors and characteristic factors appearance Port selection and

competitiveness factors have changed And the development content is introduced

in next part

30

32 Port Competitiveness Development Tree

As mentioned above port facilities port rates and charges and port location are

the basic factors in the port selection and competitiveness

From the following table we can discover that first one facilities rates and

charges and location are the most important factor in port selection and

competitiveness second one the importance of social circumstance turns larger

inland connection is necessary all the time

Table 321 Main factor in the Pretentious Research

31

port facilities rates and

charges

inland

connection

social

circumstance location

French (1979) radic radic radic

Wiliingale (1982) radic radic

Slack (1985) radic

Pater (1990) radic radic

UNCTAD (1992) radic radic radic

Murphy(1992) radic

Jeon Il-su (1992) radic radic radic

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

(1993)

radic radic radic

Kim Hak-so

(1993) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1996) radic radic radic

Ha Dong-u

amp Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1998) radic radic radic

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

radic

Kum Jong-su

(2001) radic radic radic radic

Kim Jin-gu(2002) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(2002) radic radic

Lirn(2003-2004) radic radic radic

Pater(2004) radic

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005) radic radic radic

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005) radic radic radic

Heo Yun-su

(2005) radic radic radic radic

Kim Geun-seop

(2007) radic radic radic radic

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) radic

32

33 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green

Port Construction

Following the research above Port facilities rates and charges inland

connection and social circumstance are chose in this study port selection and

competitiveness department

e-RTGC Electric rubber tired gantry crane is a mobile gantry crane used for

stacking intermodal containers within the stacking areas of a container terminal

e-RTGC are used at container terminals and container storage yards to straddling

multiple lanes of railroad and container storage or when maximum storage

density in the container stack is desired

AMP is shorted for Alternative Marine Power and Itrsquos a facility which

provides the electric system in the land for ship which entry in the port The

facility can reduce emissions which ship get entrance in the port

AGV is a mobile robot that follows markers or wires in the floor or uses

vision or lasers They are most often used in industrial applications to move

materials around a manufacturing facility or a warehouse Automatic Guided

Vehicle systems work around-the-clock making continuous flow and just-in-time

delivery easier to achieve Application of the automatic guided vehicle has broade

33

ned during the late 20th century and they are no longer restricted to industrial

environments

The e-RTGC AMP and AGV are the new clean facilities and equipments in the

Green Port they donrsquot reduce the efficiency of handling cargo and they also

reduce the CO2 emission account

Green ship certification system if a ship utilizes clean and CO2 emission

reduction technology on the ship building adds equipment and management and

son on certification would be received And the port authority gives some

incentive and preferential treatment among 45 ports Such as a better schedule is

provided for green membership ship priority in handing cargo and discount on

entrance fee

Incentives on the new cleaning technology There are two expressions about

this measure one is that the port authority give a incentive to ship which have a

great utilization on the new cleaning technology and the other one is that

environment provide many incentives to the authority which utilize the new

cleaning technology in the port such as LED street lamp solar power cranes

Green flag The Green Flag incentive program was set up to encourage ships to

slow down in order to improve air quality The Green Flag program provides

approximately $2 million a year in discounts for vessel operators who slow their

ships to 12 knots (22kmh) or less within 20miles (32km) of the harbor

34

According to the Port the Green Flag program reduced air pollution by 600tons in

2007 and is expected to do better in 2008

All of Green ship certification system incentives on the new cleaning

technology and Green Flag are incentives provided for users of port and aimed at

reduce port rates and charges So the 3 measures belong to affect port rates and

charges

Eco-friendly transport means conversion Eco-friendly means of transport are

much accounted of green port for example railway discharge less GHG emission

than truck barge with a clean engine among the river and inshore canal

Joint distribution joint distribution is a collaborative system which port

provides among many logistics companies It can make the cargo handling speed

rapidly and reduce cargo storage time for CO2 emission reducing such as

refrigerated container In an addition it also makes the logistics companies

transport more efficient

Cost on amount of CO2 emission differenced from other port the cost on

amount of CO2 is included in the port cost The cost aims to reduce the CO2

emission directly

CO2 emission reduction policies compared with other traditional port Green

Port gives more cost discount and incentives but in an addition there are many

policies on CO2 emission restriction Such as aging trucks restrictions in inland

transport department ship entry speed reduced and fuel changed in the ship

35

department and so on Whether these restriction policies constrain port

development or not and the degree of these policies constrain port development

will be explain by the AHP results

Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors some ports in the

western countries are opened as a travel place for visitors so as to change the

polluted impress and raise the position in our heart

Cost on amount of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction policies and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors can affect the social

circumstance factor Whether these measures can or not improve the social

circumstance and port competitiveness we have to see the next calculation and

results

36

Chapter 4 The Green Port Competitiveness

Analysis

41 The Green Port Competitiveness Model by AHP

The AHP is one multi-criteria decision making method which has been

extensively applied to a variety of decision-making situations The multi-criteria

techniques are considered to be a promising framework for evaluation of

decision-making factors since they have the potential to take into account

conflicting multidimensional incommensurable and uncertain effects of

decisions explicitly

In order to apply the AHP method a hierarchical decision schema was

constructed by decomposing the decision problem into its decision elements

37

After that the importance or preferences of the decision elements are examined in

a pair-wise comparison to the elements in the hierarchy The parameters are

estimated using pair-wise comparisons between the importance of the attribute or

decision element in the function using data made by each responder Making

comparisons is a question of which of the two attributes is more import as well as

how much more important

Follow these theories the Green Port Competitiveness Model choose factors as

follow in port competitiveness factors part there are port facilities port rates and

charges inland connection social circumstance in Green Port construction part

there are e-RTGC AMP AGV green ship certification system green flag

incentives on the new cleaning technology eco-friendly transport means

conversion joint distribution CO2 emission reduction policies cost on amount of

CO2 emission beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

38

Figure 41 Green Port Competitiveness AHP model

Follow the Green Port Competitiveness AHP as shown we set a questionnaire

survey to many experts scholars working in logistics system area And we got 15

ones and 14 ones results are believable and integrated

42 Green Port Competitiveness Analysis

39

The key to construction of the factors which affects the port competitiveness

is to determine the conceptual model The selection of the factors directly affects

the evaluation of the result In order to ensure the accuracy objectivity and

practicality of evaluation results the following basic principles must be followed

when selecting factors systematic principles the principle of universal

comparability practical principle and goal-oriented principle In view of the

foregoing the competitiveness which affected by Green Port construction model

is made The analysis follows established principles of port competitiveness

evaluation taking into account the characteristics and functions of the port as well

as port facilities port services port rates and charges ship entrance inland

connection social circumstances and so on

(1) Port facilities

e-RTGC U11 AMP U12 AGV U13

(2) Port rates and charges

Green ship certification system U21 Incentives on the new clean

technology U22 Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

(3) Inland connection

Eco-friendly means of transport U31 Joint distribution U32

(4) Social circumstances

40

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41 CO2 emission reduction policies

U42 Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors U43

Table 421 Details of Level I and Level II values

Level I

indicators Symbol Level II indicators Symbol

Port facilities A1

e-RTGC U11

AMP U12

AGV U13

Port rates and

charges A2

Green ship certification system U21

Incentives on the new clean technology U22

Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

Inland

connection A3

Eco-friendly means of transport U31

Joint distribution U32

Social

circumstances A4

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41

CO2 emissions reduction policies U42

Beautiful environment construction in inner

harbors U43

41

I Determination of level I indicator weights

As the ports competitiveness evaluation indicators at this level are complex

and the elements are not easily quantified AHP is adopted to determine the

indicator weights with the basic steps as follows

(1) Establish a comparative judgment matrix The comparative judgment

matrix is obtained through comparing contributed proportion of multiple

indicators to the overall target by the judgment scale wherein the fuzzy

judgment number introduced is 1 3 5 7 and 9 and the reciprocal of

such number indicates the important degree of one element relatively to

another The results are shown in next table

Table 422 Comparison matrix of level I indicators

A1 A2 A3 A4

A1 1 15 13 3

A2 5 1 3 7

A3 3 13 1 5

A4 13 17 15 1

(2) Calculate the characteristic vector of the comparative judgment matrix

which refers to the weighted vector of the indicator The writer adopts

42

the geometric method to calculate the characteristic vector The

calculated result is as follows

ω=(012 0560 026 006)T λmax=418 It can be obtained from the table

RI=09 Wherein ω is the characteristic vector corresponding to the

maximum characteristic value λmax of the comparative judgment matrix

namely the weighted vector of the indicator RI is the average

consistency indicator as shown in following table

Table423 Average random consistency indicator RI

Matrix Order

RI

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

0 0 058 09 112 124 132 141

Matrix Order

RI

9 10 11 12 13 14 15

145 149 152 154 156 158 159

(3) Conduct consistency check on the comparative judgment matrix Adopt

the random consistency proportion CR to judge the consistency of the

comparative judgment matrix According to CI= (λmax -n)(n-1) and

CR=CIRI it can be obtained through calculation CR=007lt01 Thus

this comparative judgment matrix has a satisfactory consistency and the

indicator weight coefficient calculated through this matrix is acceptable

43

II Determination of level II indicator weights

The data at this level are the details of level Ⅰ indicator The judgment

matrix obtained through comparing multiple sub-indicators under Level Ⅰ

indicators is adopted to determine the weights of sub-indicators under each

indicator one by one The specific steps are as follows

(1) The experts score the weights within the given range To determine the

weights of several small indicators under the same big indicator it is

supposed that the score of small indicator ｋ under the indicator j made

by the expert i is Xijk wherein i=12n n is the total number of

experts ј=12m m is the total number of LevelⅡ indicator к

=12Oj Oj is the number of small indicators under the big indicator ј

іјк IJK LRC l I j k

(2) The credit rating of the expert і is l l =1 2 3 l =1 indicates this expert

is quite familiar with the evaluated contents l =2 indicator this expert is

44

with the evaluated contents l =3 indicates this expert is not quite familiar

with the evaluated contents yi1 is the=08 yi2 =05 and yi3=1

(3) The comprehensive evaluation score of small indicator l under the

indicator j is as follows

(4) The formula for normalization processing of indicator weights is as

follows and the absolute weight of the indicator set is marked as

q=(q1q2q11)

(5) Because of the same justification and principle we donrsquot give the detail

about the calculation The same with the level Ⅰ calculation we

manipulation data one by one and get 14 results And obtain the average

45

results by weighted average method The results detail as Table for the

final weights of Level-Ⅱ evaluation indicators

Above the calculation process and method are just one of data from the

questionable surveys In this study the final results are got from the

weighted average by the results of each questionable survey

The final results are shown as Table424

Table424 Indicator weights table of indicator system

Level I

indicators Weight LevelⅡ indicators

Relative

weight

Absolute

weight

Importance

percentage

Port Facilities

A1 02735

e-RTGC U11 05506 01506 1506

AMP U12 01648 00451 451

AGV U13 02826 00773 773

Port Rates and

Charges A2

02902

Green ship certification s

ystem U21 04724 01371 1371

Incentives on the new

clean technology U22 02871 00833 833

Green Flag (speed

reduction incentive)U23 02405 00698 698

Inland

connection A3

02865

Eco-friendly means of

transport U31 05942 01702 1702

Joint distribution U32 04058 01163 1163

Social

environmentA4 00863

Cost on amount of CO2

emission U41 03698 00319 319

CO2 emissions reduction

policies U42 02273 00196 196

Beautiful environment

construction in inner

harbors U43

04029 00348 348

46

III Case study

In the questionable survey we also got the mark of Green Port measures

evaluation value of many main ports such as Singapore Port Shanghai Port

Hongkong Port Busan Port LALB Port Rotterdam Port and Yocohama Port

The highest mark is 5 and lowest one is 1

Table425 Evaluation value of many main ports

Singapore

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

LALB

Port

Rotterdam

Port

Yocohama

Port

Port facilities 38000 36000 34000 38182 38000 42000 32000

Port rates and

charges 32000 36000 31000 35455 32000 39000 33000

Inland

connection 39000 34545 35000 29091 35000 45000 36000

Social

circumstance 42000 32727 41000 32000 38000 42727 36000

With the Green Port and Port competitiveness indicator weights results these

ports got the final evaluation value

47

Table426 Final evaluation value on main ports Green Port measures and

competitiveness

Rotterdam

Port

Singapore

Port

LALB

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

Yocohama

Port

394 345 330 330 319 318 317

43 Results Analysis

From the results table we can obtain the many results as following

① The main Green Port measures which are more important to improve port

competitiveness are Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system the indicator weights are 01702 01506 and

01371 among the 11 indicators

② In the Green Port construction Cost on amount of CO2 emission and CO2

emissions reduction policies are the restrictions indicators but the weight

of two indicators are not big 00319 and 00196 So effect on Green Port

construction to port competitiveness does have the weaken capacity but

not clearly strengthen more clearly Thus Green Port construction really

could improve the port competitiveness

48

③ In the case study traditional ports Rotterdam and Singapore Port give us

better examples on Green Port construction especially Rotterdam Port

④ Hongkong Busan and Yocohama Port all got a lower evaluation value

But in detail Hongkong and Yocohama Port got a lower on the port

facilities and rates and charges Busan Port got a higher on the port

facilities and rates and charges but a lower on the inland connection and

social circumstance

⑤ Shanghai Port doesnrsquot have Particular strength factors but the

comprehensive strength is not bad the same as LALB Port

49

Chapter 5 Conclusion

In this thesis the effects of Green Port construction for improving the port

competitiveness have been studied Under the definition of Green Port the

characteristics of Green Port and its effects has been shown by analysing the AHP

method which based on the questionary survey for Green Port specialists and port

officers

Follow the results of analysis on Green Port competitiveness AHP model

Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green ship certification system is

better for Green Port Construction welcome for shipping companies and citizens

who live around the port And in the analysis of Port competitiveness factors port

rates and charges always affects port competitiveness a lot As a trend inland

connection factor abstracts more attention of shipping companies

50

On the trend of port department each port should take a activity to adjust

strategy for improving its competitiveness Such as in the main ports evaluation

Busan port get a high value on port rates and charges and port facilities but as a

lower value on inland connection factor the final value is not as well as we look

forward In the evaluation of Singapore Port through it gets a lower value on rates

and charges higher value on inland connection and social circumstance causes the

final value are better So the Green Port Construction may be a trend in port

department

In the results of this thesis Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system are better solutions for Green Port Construction And

especially it can be verified that the port rates and charges always affects port

competitiveness Futhermore the investment for Green Port construction and its

effects have to be verified in the future

51

References

1 Hoyle B S and Smith J 1992 Transport and Development In Modern

transport geography edited by B S Hoyle R D Knowles (London Belhaven

Press)pp11-31

2 Beresford A K C De Souza A J R G and Pettit S J 2005 Stategic

development of liner shipping companies and terminal operators Ocean yearbook

19(Chicago 1L The University of Chicago Press) pp 732-750

3 Heaver T D 2002 Supply chain and logistics management implications for

liner shipping In The handbook of maritime economics and business edited by C

Grammenos (LondonLLP) pp 375-396

4 Park T E (2011) A Study on selection criteria of Green Port and evaluation of

major Korean port A masters thesis of graduate school of Incheon university

52

5 JeongBH (2009)Green port management policy directions in the green

growth era- The case of Gwangyang port in Republic of Korea Journal of Korea

Port Economic Association Vol25(3) p361-384

6 Lee J S Han N H(2009) A study on Green Port Revitalization According to

Air Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

7 Lee Y K Nan J W(2010)Green Logistics Policy Analysis and Implications

of Japan

8 Lee B S (2010)Tendency and Countermeasures on Green Logistics in Port

Logistics Company A masters thesis of graduate school of Korean Maritime

university

9 Lee J S (2009) A Study on Green Port Revitalization According to Air

Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

10 Zhang F Y Li Z Lu X J Yao X L(2008)Competitiveness of Inland

Ports Based on F-AHP

11 Port of Long Beach (2009) Green Port Policy wwwpolbcom

12 The port of Los Angeles wwwportoflosangelesorg

III

本 論文을 Wang Liru 의 物流學碩士 學位論文으로 認准함

委員長 郭圭錫 印

委 員 南奇燦 印

委 員 金煥成 印

2011 년 8월

한국해양대학교 대학원

IV

Acknowledgement

I sincerely would like to appreciate my supervisor Professor Kim

Hwan-Seong With his help and constant encouragement whether study or daily

life I successfully complete my master course in Department of Logistics His

strict academic attitude and enthusiasm deeply impressed me and helped me to

archive success in research and study

I am grateful to Professor Nam Ki-Chan Logistics System and

Transportation Planning Professor Kwak Kyu-Seok Port Logistics and Social

Engineering Professor Shin Jae-Yeong Management Science and Logistics

Information System They all helped me immeasurably in detailing comments

I also would like to thank to all the members of Logistic Automation Lab

for giving me a helpful active and comfortable environment Ms Jo Min-Ji Mr

Tran Ngoc Hoang Son Mr Lim Chang-Won Mr Tran Xuan Thuong Mr Park

U-Seok Ms Lee Myung-Hwa

I also would like to give special thanks to my parents for their love

supporting me all the time and Korean and Chinese friends for their friendliness

sharing and confidence Ms Jeong Eun-Sil Mr Kim Jong-Hak Mr Lim

Jin-Gang Mr Chen Chao Mr Miao Yu Ms Guan Xin Ms Tian Mingbo and so

on

Korea Maritime University Busan Korea

June 30th 2011

Wang Liru

V

The Effects of Green Port Construction for

Improving the Port Competitiveness

Wang Liru

Department of Logistics

Graduate School of Korea Maritime University 2011

Abstract

According to increase the economy development the global warming and the

environment pollution are the greatest problems in the world Since ltKyoto

protocolgt has been brought out in 1990 citizens pay more attention to climate

change and environment protection By the trend of environment protection port

department makes a great effort on green port construction against the pollution

The aim of this study is concerns with the effects of Green Port construction for

improving the port competitiveness First of all the definition of Green Port is

described and its main characteristics are shown by using four classifications

VI

Second the measure factors for Green Port construction is suggested by through

the previous literature reviews and an evaluation model is designed

To evaluate the Green Port construction the questionary survey for Green Port

specialists and port officers is achieved And the effect factors for Green Port

construction are obtained by using AHP(Analytic Hierarchy Process) method

Last the relationship between Green Port construction and port competitiveness is

verified by analyzing the effect factors Thus the port competitiveness would be

improved by construction of Green Port

VII

항만경쟁력 강화를 위한 그린포트 구축효과 분석

Wang Liru

물류시스템공학과

한국해양대학교 대학원

국문초록

2009 년 세계 경제 위기 이후 회복세로 바뀜에 의해 항만산업의 물동량이

증가하고 선박의 대형화 및 신속화가 점차 가속화됨에 따라 항만 시장도

경쟁이 치열할 것으로 전망되어진다

한편 교토의정서가 공식 발효됨에 따라 각국에서는 대기오염에 대한 관심이

증가되고 있으며 CO2 배출량에 대한 감축 목표를 설정할 정도로 대기오염을

방지하는 자구책을 강구하고 있다 이에 따라 항만에서도 그린포트로의

전환이 불가피한 실정이다

따라서 본 연구에서는 그린포트구축 활동을 항만의 경쟁력관점에서

고찰하여 각 특징을 분석한다 또한 전문가의 설문조사를 행하고 이에 대한

VIII

AHP 분석을 통하여 그린포트 구축 활동간의 우선순위를 도출하며 구축결과가

항만의 경쟁력에 어떠한 영향을 미칠 것인지를 고찰한다

IX

List of Figures

Figure 11 Research Process 4

Figure 21 Green Port appearance and basic definition 10

Figure 41 Green Port Competitiveness AHP model 38

X

List of Tables

Table 211 Objective of CO2 reduces in main countries 8

Table 221 4kinds Green Port construction promote directions 11

Table 231 Details of LALB Port Green Port Promotion Programs 13

Table 232 Short term and Long term Green Port Plans in Auckland Port 16

Table 233 Summary of the Main Port of Green Port Measures 21

Table 241 Green Port measures in port each department 23

Table 311 Prevention literature research results 27

Table 312 Literature research in Korean academia 28

Table 321 Main factor in the Pretentious Research 31

Table 421 Details of Level I and Level II values 40

Table 422 Comparison matrix of level I indicators 41

Table 423 Average random consistency indicator RI 42

Table 424 Indicator weights table of indicator system 45

Table 425 Evaluation value of many main ports 46

Table 426 Final evaluation value on main ports Green Port measures and

competitiveness 47

XI

CONTENT

Abstract V

List of Figures IX

List of Tables X

Chapter 1 Introduction 1

11 Research background and objective 1

12 Scope and structure of research 3

Chapter 2 Green Port Construction Situation 6

21 Green Port Construction Background 6

22 The Definition of Green Port 9

23 Green Port Construction Situation in major countries 12

24 Green Port Indicators Research 22

Chapter 3 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green Port

Construction 24

31 Port Competitiveness Literature Review 24

32 Port Competitiveness Development Tree 30

33 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green Port

Construction 32

Chapter 4 The Green Port Competitiveness Analysis 36

41 The Green Port Competitiveness Model by AHP 36

42 Green Port Competitiveness Analysis 38

XII

43 Results Analysis 47

Chapter 5 Conclusion 49

References 51

1

Chapter 1 Introduction

11 Research background and objective

The Kyoto Protocol is an international agreement linked to the United Nations

Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) The major feature of the

Kyoto Protocol is that it sets binding targets for 37 industrialized countries and the

European community for reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to fight

global warming These amounts will be lower an average of five per cent based on

1990 levels over the five-year period 2008-2012 The protocol was initially

adopted on 11 December 1997 in Japan but entered into force on 16 February

2005 As of July 2010 191 countries and states have signed and ratified the

protocol

2

After ltKyoto Protocolgt has brought out in 1997 more and more people put

their attention on environment pollution Rapid development in industry

department brings out air water soil noise and wildlife pollution and destruction

As the health development of economic alleviating environmental pollution and

restoring original ecology extremely necessary

Focus on the long-term and future development in the port many counties

government and ports authorities pay attentions on Green Port construction

In the short term C40 World Ports Climate Conference draws up some

adaptive plans among big cities and major ports The plans include the incentives

provided to green ship user cooperation among the C40 member ports

encouragement to develop and utilize the Alternative Maritime Power and so on

In EU Green Port major policies is prohibition the ship utilization on fuel

which sulfur content over 2 (after Jun2010 the limitation of sulfur content is

1) There are also Marco Polo I and Marco Polo II plans in EU In Marco Polo I

Modal Shift Action Catalyst Action and Common Learning Action are included

from 2003 to 2006 And after 2007 in Marco II Motorways of the Sea Action

Traffic Avoidance Actions and Rail Synergy are added

In US people pay more attention to developing the new technology for

reducing CO2 emission Such as power generator and renewable resources and

Northwest Ports Clean Air Strategy

3

Compared with other departments green policy in port department is explained

as green maritime and green shipping For example super-eco ship building and

Modal Shift promotion

The same aim to Hong Kong Ports AMP E-RTG hybrid truck bio-diesel

recycling energy CNG LNG and development are in utilization

ldquoGreen Growth Policyrdquo is the measure which brought out by the Korean

government Follow this strategy Korean port authority also takes out the ldquoGreen

Port building comprehensive planrdquo Furthermore low carbon self-sufficiency port

the disaster safety port eco-friendly port and resource recycling port are the

understandings on the Korean ldquoGreen Growth Policyrdquo

As the port support policies being changed port competitiveness factors are

changed Especially the importance degree of each factor has been changed a

lot The purpose of this study is explaining the competitiveness effects changed

which taking Green Port measures and programs port and give a better advice and

suggestion to Green Port construction

12 Scope and structure of research

The method to analysis the effects of Green Port construction for improving

port competitiveness is AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process)

4

And research process in this study is shown in ltFigure 1gt

ltFigure 1gt Research process

In chapter 1 research background and objective research method and process

are included And chapter 2 introduces the Green Port construction background

definition the Green Port construction situation in many countries and each

department introduction in Green Port construction The chapter 3 views the

literature on port competitiveness and obtains the influence factors used in this

study trend and relationship between port competitiveness The chapter 4 based

5

on the survey data and calculates each indicator importance degree by AHP

method and analysis the result Finally in chapter 5 the conclusion summary the

whole study by the result analysis

6

Chapter 2 Green Port Construction Situation

21 Green Port Construction Background

As the United Nations Secretary General has said the greatest challenge which

we are facing is environmental regulators It is a growing crisis with economic

health and safety food production security and other dimensions

The Kyoto Protocol is an international agreement linked to the United Nations

Framework Convention on Climate Change The major feature of the Kyoto

Protocol is that it sets binding targets for 37 industrialized countries and the

European community for reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to fight

global warming These amount to an average of five percent bellow 1990 level

over the five-year period 2008-2012

The protocol was initially adopted on 11 December 1997 in Japan but all of the

member countries entered into force on16 February 2005 The Kyoto Protocol

7

was adopted in Kyoto Japan on 11 December 1997 and entered into force on 16

February 2005 The detailed rules for the implementation of the Protocol were

adopted at COP 7 in Marrakesh in 2001 and are called the ldquoMarrakesh Accordsrdquo

Follow the ltKyoto Protocolgt several flexible mechanisms are allowed Such

as emissions trading the clean development mechanism (CDM) and joint

implementation The mechanisms allow AnnexⅠcounties to meet their GHG

emission limitations by purchasing GHG emission reductions credits from

elsewhere through financial exchanges projects that reduce emissions in

non-Annex Ⅰ countries or Annex Ⅰ countries with excess allowances The

mechanisms help stimulate green investment and help Parties meet their emission

targets in a cost-effective way

Therefore many countries take action on reducing the GHG discharge emission

For example increase the energy utilization efficiency develop the solar power

wind energy tidal energy and other clean energy in their industry The details

about objective of GHG emission reduction in main countries are displayed as the

following ltTable 1gt

8

ltTable 1gt Objective of CO2 reduce in main countries

Bench

mark of

Year

Objective

()

Absolute

quantity

()

Remark

EU 1990 20~30 -20~-30 Norway New Zealand 40 reducing

USA 2005 17 -3 Passed by House of Representatives

Japan 1990 25 -25 On the premise of attention with China

India

Korea 2020

(BAU) 30 mdashmdash

Discharge amount is up to 564million don

in estimation

China 2005 40~50 60~150

(2005) Each GDP

India 2005 20-25 mdashmdash With the developed countries

participation

Russia 1990 25 -25 Be neutral country

Norway 1990 30~40 -30~-40 mdashmdash

New

Zealand 1990 10~20 -10~ -20 mdashmdash

Austria 2000 5~25 -3~-11 mdashmdash

Canada 2003 20 -3 mdashmdash

Mexico 2002 50 mdashmdash With the developed countries

participation

South

Africa

2020

(BAU) 34 mdashmdash

With the developed countries

participation

Brazil 2020

(BAU) 36~39

-20

(2005) mdashmdash

(Korean Maritime Institute 20095)

9

22 The Definition of Green Port

As the global warming affecting in the world climate has been heavily changed

natural disaster frequently occurred natural resources depletion and supply

imbalance cause crisis to reach a high level For the purpose of getting away from

financial crisis and creating the new growth motivity the counties in the world

make more efforts on developing economic

Because of the realization of this global climate and environment crisis Korean

government had brought out the ldquoGreen Growth Policyrdquo And it made the ldquoGreen

Growth Policyrdquo be embodied and law-governed announced ldquoLow Carbon Green

Growth of the Basic Lawrdquo

In order to coordinate with this policy and law build up the ldquoGreen Growthrdquo

everyone make their efforts and reach ldquoGreen Growthrdquo in Korea each department

As a important industry department port authority also take activity to match the

national strategy of ldquoGreen Growthrdquo and draw up the plan on ldquoGreen Portrdquo

construction

However there isnrsquot a clear definition about the Green Port Korean Land

Transport and Maritime Ministry have explained the Green Port as follows Green

house gas Reducing Energy Effciencing Nature-friendly Port The explanation is

very easy to understand but from a professional point of view it not very

10

comprehensive and concrete So we have to understand the concept in the Green

Port Construction measures and programs There are about 4 kind explanation and

promotion programs in the Green Port Respectively the port which based on

green technology and green business creating new growth motive improving

living standards jumping in the ranks of the advanced port

ltFigure 2gt Green Port appearance and basic definition

In the Green Growth National Strategy Policy there are 10 pieces of policy

directions and 50 researches each department should choose the appropriate one

Follow these researches chose by port availability especially Low Carbon

11

Self-sufficiency Port The Disaster Safety Port Eco-friendly Port Resource

Recycling Port and in this study Green Port construction is a plan on

comprehensive and mix of 4kinds of Green Port Construction

Table 221 Four Promotions for Green Port Construction

Promotion Program

(Green Port type) Activities

Low-Carbon

Self-Sufficiency Port

Eco-friendly inland transportation system building

New renewable resources power equipment utilization

AMP LED utilization

The Disaster Safety

Port

Disaster Prevention environment infrastructure building

Disaster prediction and corresponding system utilization

Eco-Friendly Port Beauty the port by green park planting and so on

Provide eco-friendly port building programs

Resource Recycling

Port

Port waste (silt soil) effectively recycling system

Establish resource recycling port paragon

As table1 shown each type of Green Port has a separate emphasis

Eco-friendly inland transportation system which encourages utilizing rail canal

barge clean system reduces the truck application amount AMP means

Alternative Maritime Power supply system replaces with ship power generation

The Green Port construction in most of counties is the low-carbon self-sufficiency

12

port And in their construction maybe add a few other type promote director like

beauty the port by green park planting and so on

However in this study the Green Port concept is a comprehensive plan among

4 types not a specialization system

23 Green Port Construction Situation in major countries

After ltKyoto protocolgt having brought out each department began to take

affords on the reducing the GHG (greenhouse gas) emission In port department

the activities are embodied in the Green Port construction In this study many

major ports in US EU Japan and Korea are chose to explain for research

231 US

① LALB Port

In order to achieve to reduce marine pollutants standby and build clean port

LALB Port standby resource ministry and environment protection ministry

signed a 5year plan on clean standby action cooperation

This promotion business plan set a set of marine pollutants standby emission

limitation on the ship department from the statistics year 2006-2007 to 2010-2011

handling department heavy duty equipment truck department and so on Such as

13

in Green Port Technology construction department measures and programs are

shown in following Table

Table231 the details of LALB Port Green Port Promotion Programs

Promotion Program

Heavy Equipment Truck

Heavy Equipment

Replace and Update Aging Facilities

Substitute Fuels and Clean Fuel Incentives

Budgetary for the Development of Substitute Fuels

Marine Vessels Tugs

Ship Speed Reduction within the Port

Electrical supply of parking in the Berth

Use low-sulfur fuel (supplementary motor)

Handling Equipment

Air Quality Monitoring

Measure ambient air pollution levels in the vicinity of

the Port

Include a number of real-time air quality measurements

On the restrict situation of heavy equipment trucks and others vessels must to

be replaced and rebuilt in order to minimum the emission of NOx And the trucks

which donrsquot reach the regulate standard do not allowed to get in the port These

regulations will help their owner to replace and update trucks and also set up a

replacement plan to 16000 aging trucks make the replace done by 2012 As

foundation repaired the cargo owner must to pay an addition tax about 20ft 35$

40ft 79$

14

In the maritime department the speed reduction incentive took action in

Jan2005 When ship entry into the port boundary speed must be reduced under

20 miles 12kont At the beginning the effect of this plan is very clearly so the

limitation may be raised to 40mile And AMP (Alternative Maritime Power ) is

encouraged to be built and developed as to ship use their engine and get GHG

emission

② New York- New Jersey Port

The New York- New Jersey Port Authority brought out environment policy on

CO2 emission reduction The main concepts as following first reduce PX SOX

3 each year and CO2 5 Second ship must utilize sulfur-low fuel as a

obligation Third AMP is provided Forth modern the unloading and loading

equipment must be built Fifth promote trucks replacement Sixth reform the ship

engine Seventh invent 9 billion dollars in the following 10 years Eighth invent

to all hybrid equipment (325) Ninth install the hybrid truck in AMPT and

NYCT

③ Seattle Port

15

In Seattle Port Air Environment Maritime Improvement plan has been

accepted in 2005 The plan includes first set up Puget Sound Maritime Air

Forum and make one AMP provide services for two tour ships second change

the diesel hybrid equipment into electric utilization Third use bio-diesel and

diesel catalyst and reduce the emission Forth emphasize the standard and plan of

truck minimum the idling time

Seattle Port Tacoma Port and Vancouver made a assignment and promote

ldquoNorthwest Ports Clean Air Strategyrdquo

④ Auckland Port

Auckland Port set up the aging replacement plan in 2008 and invent 20 milion

dollars gas emission should reach the level And cargo transport system in port

hinterland port authority and Air environment management committee make

cooperation and give an incentive to truck which use new clean technology

Table232 Short term and Long term Green Port Plans in Auckland Port

16

17

232 EU

Rotterdam Port

As the biggest Port in EU Rotterdam Port takes more affords in reducing the

CO2 emission Main programs are low carbon footprint AMP and so on The

limitation of CO2 emission reduces down 50 of 1990 by 2025

In July 2008 the authority of Rotterdam port gave international cooperation

with other ports an extra boost by organizing the World Ports Climate Conference

During this conference the authority of Rotterdam discussed possible ways in

which ports and business could reduce air pollution and CO2 emissions The

proposals the authority of Rotterdam was set out in a declaration which was

supported by all 55 port cities attending the conference The conference resulted

in five projects to improve air quality and reduce CO2 emissions The authority of

Rotterdam is behind the project to further elaborate an Environmental Ship Index

The Rotterdam Climate Initiative is a joint venture with the municipality of

Rotterdam DCMR Environmental Protection Agency Rijnmond and Deltalinqs

Common goal is to halve CO2 emissions in the region by 2025 in comparison with

1990 levels In connection with the Rotterdam Climate Initiative the port works

on (together with DCMR and others) creating an infrastructure for the capture

18

transport and storage of CO2 A business case presented in the summer of 2008 is

now being elaborated into a business plan The business case concludes that

Rotterdam can begin in 2015 with the capture transport and underground storage

of five million tons of CO2 per annum This means that the basic infrastructure

will then be in place for further growth in capture and storage to twenty million

tons in 2025

In 2008 a start was made on the development of a sustainability index for

activities relating to the P for Planet (environment) In 2009 it will further expand

the index to cover the P for People and the P for Profit In the first phase of the

sustainability index CO2 footprint sustainable purchasing sustainable building

and sustainable land allocation will be covered

233 Japan

① Tacoma Port

In the Tacoma Port there are some programs on protecting the air water and

soil environment

In the air protection department ldquoNorthwest Ports Clean Air Strategyrdquo

ldquoGreen Gateway for Traderdquo and ldquoTruck Programrdquo had brought out to against air

pollution The concepts include using ultra-low sulfur diesel bio-diesel and other

cleaner-burning fuels in cargo-handling equipment using low-sulfur distillate

19

fuels at berth adding ldquogreen designrdquo environmental features to ships including

diesel-electric motors that save up to 30 percent in fuel and significantly reduce

emissions setting targets to change older less-efficient truck engines installing

anti-idling devices on rail-switching engines as well as partnering on other

innovative technological advance

The Port of Tacomarsquos four dockside rail yards move cargo quickly and

efficiently from container terminals They also reduce the number of trucks on

city streets and highways Each full train that leaves the Port represents 250 to 300

trucks not on our roads reducing roadway congestion and diesel emissions The

lowest emission route to ship cargo from Asia to the US Midwest is through the

Puget Sound according to the results of a study by Herbert Engineering released

in May 2009

And in the land protection program there are successful clean projects open

spaces and future habitat restoration In 2007 the Port purchased about 70 acres

of open space known as Juliarsquos Gulch and Storey Pit located between the

Tideflats and residential Northeast Tacoma Monitor water quality system is in

utilization in the water department in Tacoma Port

② Tokyo Port

In the Tokyo Port Green Port programs are almost similar with Tacoma Port

e-RTGC (Rubber Tired Gantry Crane) the barge between Tokyo and Yocohama

20

which shorten international maritime container cargo transportation land distance

super eco-shipbuilding technology dissemination and promotion green business

certification operation and shippers and logistics companies support cooperation

③ Osaka Port and Hakata Port

AMP electrical power equipment and solar power equipment are in utilization in

Osaka Port E-RTGC and solar power of refrigerated container are in utilization in

the Hakata Port

234 Korea

In Busan Port a set of Green Port took implementation such as LNG truck

E-RTGC equipment utilization eco-friendly transport means conversion (rail

canal barge) and GHG emission reduction obligation Table233

21

ltTable 233gt Summary of the Main Port of Green Port Measures

COUNTRY PORT MEASURES

US

LALB Port

Green flag AMP discharge gas reduction obligation

recommends use of alternative fuels and clean fuel

funding for the development of alternative fuels facilities

by new engine development instead of NOx emissions

green truck program (reduce70-80) low-sulfur fuel

utilization restore and revitalize the Los Cerritos

Wetlands

New York

Port

AMP modernized facilities utilization high speed hybrid

yard

Auckland

Port

Incentives on the new cleaning technology containers

transportation system

Seattle Port

AMP green ship membership Tier 4 level reducing PM

by 1994 level Smart Way program Northwest Ports

Clean Air Strategy

EU Rotterdam

Port

Clean engine (barge) green ship membership carbon

footprint calculation cruise ship which under port

authority change to use low-sulfur fuel low emission

engine development and utilization Green Award AMP

ship recycling incentives

Japan

Tokyo Port

RTGC (Rubber Tired Gantry Crane) apply for the barge

between Tokyo and Yocohama shorten international

maritime container cargo transportation land distance

super eco-shipbuilding technology dissemination and

promotion green business certification operation

shippers and logistics companies support cooperation

Osaka Port AMP electrical power equipment solar power equipment

Hakata Port E-RTGC solar power utilization in refrigerated container

Korea Busan Port

LNG truck E-RTGC eco-friendly transport means

conversion (rail canal barge) GHG emission reduction

obligation

22

24 Green Port Indicators Research

As the previous section list shown Green Port measures and programs are

substantially the same

When a ship entry in the port boundary from voyage many ports give a

incentive on shifting and utilizing sulfur-low fuel and reducing the speed under

20 miles when the ship berth in the port the alternative maritime power are

provided which replace its power generation

Next in the cargo unloading and loading department the same with above

utilization of sulfur-low fuel and electrical equipment are promoted and

eco-driving education to driver is necessary what speed is fuel fully burning and

emission minimum point

In the cargo transport department in other words truck department the

replacement on aging trucks is popular in many ports aging trucks are prohibited

close to port at the same time an incentive or support function are provided on

aging replacement The automated equipments are recommended to utilize in the

Green Port like hybrid yard tractor And a perfect plan on truck running also could

reduce the idling time and against the emission of CO2

The details reference the following Table 241

23

Table241 Green Port measures in port each department

Emission reduction programs

Ship

department

Shipping

in the

port

boundary

Obligation on the utilization of sulfur-low fuel

Reform ship engine and utilize hybrid

Speed reduce in the port entrance(a off-shore fee

incentive)

Off-shore AMP

Shift utilization system of clean fuel

Unloading and loading

department

Obligation on the utilization of sulfur-low fuel

Replace electrical equipment

Eco-driving

Truck department Hybrid yard tractor utilization

Promote aging truck replacement

Minimum the idling time

Others LED light in the Port

Develop renew and recycle resource energy

The Green Port measures in this study are e-RTGC AMP AGV Green Ship

certification system incentives on the new clean technology Green Flag(speed

reduction incentive)eco-friendly transport means conversion joint distribution

the cost on account of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction polities and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

The details and definition on each Green Port measure and the relationship with

Port Competitiveness will be expressed in next chapter

24

Chapter 3 The Relationship between Port

Competitiveness and Green Port Construction

31 Port Competitiveness Literature Review

Although past studies on port selection models have focused on port selection

made by port facilities port services port rates and charge and location

Murphy made a survey between 534 shipping companies and port authorities in

1989 and between 1850 shipping companies and port authorities in 1992

Comparing with other papers Murphys got a survey among more widely

objects In his paper port selection(port competitiveness) was seen to affected by

facilities situation appropriate pilotage max ship entrance probability the

25

capability of handling non-regular cargos whether to provide information of ship

nationality or not and port services level

In French model (1979) there are two factors affecting the port selection (port

competitiveness) endogenous factor and exogenous factor In endogenous factors

there are adequacy and physical plant condition of terminal facilities terminal rate

and charges frequency and geographic coverage of ship and freight services the

capacity of connecting to inland rails or transport net and the services provides for

the shipping or logistics And exogenous factors included the size and economic

capacity of hinterland as a source exports or market for imports national

economic situation trade policy and support established by government the

situation at home and abroad

The same as Frenchs paper in Paters paper in 1990 there are endogenous and

exogenous factors too In endogenous there are the services provides for the

shipping or logistics capacity of terminal facilities situation and condition of

facilities operation strategies established by port authority convenience to utilize

And the political situation at home and abroad social change economic factor

stabilized labor and capital However in 2004 there is a tremendous change in

Peters new paper There are four parts multi-modal process interface transport

modes infrastructure Multi-model Process part includes ship entrance rapid

speed and accuracy shipper and shipping companies reactive operation flexibility

Interface includes labor power information technology and so on And there are

26

ship calls frequency and amount of fleet factors in the transport modes part In the

infrastructure part includes port facility equipments and so on

Port facilities rates and charges services inland situation and social

circumstance factors affect the port selection and competitiveness a lot from the

research until 1992 by Murphy And in Lirn and Pater research 2003-2004 the

new and detail factors are shown to us

We can clearly see the contents in next table

27

Table 311 Prevention literature research results

Influence factors

French

(1979)

Endogenous

port facilities port rate and charges calls frequency port services

port connection with inland

Exogenous

economic size of hinterland national economic situation trade

policy home and abroad situation

Willingale

(1982)

voyage distance economy size entrance to port and route port

facilities max ship entrance probability port operation rates and

charges port authority scale of port

Slack

(1985)

cost of inland transportation port proximity ship demurrage

multi-transport

Peter

(1990)

Endogenous

port facilities condition of facilities operation strategies

convenience to utilize

Exogenous

political situation social change economic factor stabilized labor

and capital

UNCTAD

(1992)

port facilities services location level of financial industry

information communication system social circumstances economic

stability

Murphy

(1992)

facilities situation appropriate pilotage max ship entrance

probability the capability of handling non-regular cargos whether to

provide information of ship nationality or not port services level

Lirn

(2003-2004)

physical and technologic facilities geopolitical location port

operation and management shipping and terminal cost

Peter

(2004)

Multi-modal Process

ship entrance rapid speed and accuracy shipper and shipping

companies reactive operation flexibility

Interface labor and capital

Transport modes ship calls frequency and amount of fleet factors

28

And there are many experts and scholars research for the influence factors to

port selection and competitiveness in Korea The specific content follows table5

Table 312 Literature research in Korean academia

Influence factors

Jeon Il-su (1992) location facilities charges service level (EDI) terminal operation

port authority

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

( 1993 )

location facilities throughput charges service operation

situation

Kim Hak-so

(1993)

export shipping amount of annual cost of each ton of cargo

marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km of

cargo loading time

import marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km

of cargo amount of liner ship

Yeo Gi-tae (1996) location facilities throughput charge service operation situation

Ha Dong-u amp

Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

location facilities service level logistics charges environment of

logistics service

Yeo Gi-tae (1999) location facilities throughput charges service

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

throughput quay length yard area GNP

Kum Jong-su

(2001)

distance between port and cargo site terminal facilities service

the capacity of multi-transport capacity of cargo handling

administrative service rates and charges of inland transport

congestion

Yeo Gi-tae (2002) location throughput facilities service level

Kim Jin-gu (2002) port facilities location cargo amount rates and charges services

29

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005)

voyage degree to attract cargo cargo handling cost amount of

handling cargo connection to inland service reliability location

berth availability quay length feeder network depth

transshipment volumes cargo security profitability

offing degree to attract cargo berth availability cargo handling

cost transshipment volumes

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005)

cargo handling amount port facilities location rates and charges

level of service

Heo Yun-su

(2005)

port facilities rates and charges services marketing geopolitics

location economic and social circumstance

Kim Geun-seop

(2007)

port services facilities cargo handling amount location cost

productivity factor global factor

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) rates and charges services port characteristics

Many experts and scholars make a research on port selection and

competitiveness recently But the factors selection criteria are difference

Nevertheless the main factors are facilities services cost and so on

Therefore port competitiveness factors which chose in this study are port

facilities port services port rates and charges and social circumstance

However the main factors are not the whole factors any more more and more

detail factors and characteristic factors appearance Port selection and

competitiveness factors have changed And the development content is introduced

in next part

30

32 Port Competitiveness Development Tree

As mentioned above port facilities port rates and charges and port location are

the basic factors in the port selection and competitiveness

From the following table we can discover that first one facilities rates and

charges and location are the most important factor in port selection and

competitiveness second one the importance of social circumstance turns larger

inland connection is necessary all the time

Table 321 Main factor in the Pretentious Research

31

port facilities rates and

charges

inland

connection

social

circumstance location

French (1979) radic radic radic

Wiliingale (1982) radic radic

Slack (1985) radic

Pater (1990) radic radic

UNCTAD (1992) radic radic radic

Murphy(1992) radic

Jeon Il-su (1992) radic radic radic

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

(1993)

radic radic radic

Kim Hak-so

(1993) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1996) radic radic radic

Ha Dong-u

amp Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1998) radic radic radic

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

radic

Kum Jong-su

(2001) radic radic radic radic

Kim Jin-gu(2002) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(2002) radic radic

Lirn(2003-2004) radic radic radic

Pater(2004) radic

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005) radic radic radic

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005) radic radic radic

Heo Yun-su

(2005) radic radic radic radic

Kim Geun-seop

(2007) radic radic radic radic

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) radic

32

33 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green

Port Construction

Following the research above Port facilities rates and charges inland

connection and social circumstance are chose in this study port selection and

competitiveness department

e-RTGC Electric rubber tired gantry crane is a mobile gantry crane used for

stacking intermodal containers within the stacking areas of a container terminal

e-RTGC are used at container terminals and container storage yards to straddling

multiple lanes of railroad and container storage or when maximum storage

density in the container stack is desired

AMP is shorted for Alternative Marine Power and Itrsquos a facility which

provides the electric system in the land for ship which entry in the port The

facility can reduce emissions which ship get entrance in the port

AGV is a mobile robot that follows markers or wires in the floor or uses

vision or lasers They are most often used in industrial applications to move

materials around a manufacturing facility or a warehouse Automatic Guided

Vehicle systems work around-the-clock making continuous flow and just-in-time

delivery easier to achieve Application of the automatic guided vehicle has broade

33

ned during the late 20th century and they are no longer restricted to industrial

environments

The e-RTGC AMP and AGV are the new clean facilities and equipments in the

Green Port they donrsquot reduce the efficiency of handling cargo and they also

reduce the CO2 emission account

Green ship certification system if a ship utilizes clean and CO2 emission

reduction technology on the ship building adds equipment and management and

son on certification would be received And the port authority gives some

incentive and preferential treatment among 45 ports Such as a better schedule is

provided for green membership ship priority in handing cargo and discount on

entrance fee

Incentives on the new cleaning technology There are two expressions about

this measure one is that the port authority give a incentive to ship which have a

great utilization on the new cleaning technology and the other one is that

environment provide many incentives to the authority which utilize the new

cleaning technology in the port such as LED street lamp solar power cranes

Green flag The Green Flag incentive program was set up to encourage ships to

slow down in order to improve air quality The Green Flag program provides

approximately $2 million a year in discounts for vessel operators who slow their

ships to 12 knots (22kmh) or less within 20miles (32km) of the harbor

34

According to the Port the Green Flag program reduced air pollution by 600tons in

2007 and is expected to do better in 2008

All of Green ship certification system incentives on the new cleaning

technology and Green Flag are incentives provided for users of port and aimed at

reduce port rates and charges So the 3 measures belong to affect port rates and

charges

Eco-friendly transport means conversion Eco-friendly means of transport are

much accounted of green port for example railway discharge less GHG emission

than truck barge with a clean engine among the river and inshore canal

Joint distribution joint distribution is a collaborative system which port

provides among many logistics companies It can make the cargo handling speed

rapidly and reduce cargo storage time for CO2 emission reducing such as

refrigerated container In an addition it also makes the logistics companies

transport more efficient

Cost on amount of CO2 emission differenced from other port the cost on

amount of CO2 is included in the port cost The cost aims to reduce the CO2

emission directly

CO2 emission reduction policies compared with other traditional port Green

Port gives more cost discount and incentives but in an addition there are many

policies on CO2 emission restriction Such as aging trucks restrictions in inland

transport department ship entry speed reduced and fuel changed in the ship

35

department and so on Whether these restriction policies constrain port

development or not and the degree of these policies constrain port development

will be explain by the AHP results

Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors some ports in the

western countries are opened as a travel place for visitors so as to change the

polluted impress and raise the position in our heart

Cost on amount of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction policies and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors can affect the social

circumstance factor Whether these measures can or not improve the social

circumstance and port competitiveness we have to see the next calculation and

results

36

Chapter 4 The Green Port Competitiveness

Analysis

41 The Green Port Competitiveness Model by AHP

The AHP is one multi-criteria decision making method which has been

extensively applied to a variety of decision-making situations The multi-criteria

techniques are considered to be a promising framework for evaluation of

decision-making factors since they have the potential to take into account

conflicting multidimensional incommensurable and uncertain effects of

decisions explicitly

In order to apply the AHP method a hierarchical decision schema was

constructed by decomposing the decision problem into its decision elements

37

After that the importance or preferences of the decision elements are examined in

a pair-wise comparison to the elements in the hierarchy The parameters are

estimated using pair-wise comparisons between the importance of the attribute or

decision element in the function using data made by each responder Making

comparisons is a question of which of the two attributes is more import as well as

how much more important

Follow these theories the Green Port Competitiveness Model choose factors as

follow in port competitiveness factors part there are port facilities port rates and

charges inland connection social circumstance in Green Port construction part

there are e-RTGC AMP AGV green ship certification system green flag

incentives on the new cleaning technology eco-friendly transport means

conversion joint distribution CO2 emission reduction policies cost on amount of

CO2 emission beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

38

Figure 41 Green Port Competitiveness AHP model

Follow the Green Port Competitiveness AHP as shown we set a questionnaire

survey to many experts scholars working in logistics system area And we got 15

ones and 14 ones results are believable and integrated

42 Green Port Competitiveness Analysis

39

The key to construction of the factors which affects the port competitiveness

is to determine the conceptual model The selection of the factors directly affects

the evaluation of the result In order to ensure the accuracy objectivity and

practicality of evaluation results the following basic principles must be followed

when selecting factors systematic principles the principle of universal

comparability practical principle and goal-oriented principle In view of the

foregoing the competitiveness which affected by Green Port construction model

is made The analysis follows established principles of port competitiveness

evaluation taking into account the characteristics and functions of the port as well

as port facilities port services port rates and charges ship entrance inland

connection social circumstances and so on

(1) Port facilities

e-RTGC U11 AMP U12 AGV U13

(2) Port rates and charges

Green ship certification system U21 Incentives on the new clean

technology U22 Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

(3) Inland connection

Eco-friendly means of transport U31 Joint distribution U32

(4) Social circumstances

40

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41 CO2 emission reduction policies

U42 Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors U43

Table 421 Details of Level I and Level II values

Level I

indicators Symbol Level II indicators Symbol

Port facilities A1

e-RTGC U11

AMP U12

AGV U13

Port rates and

charges A2

Green ship certification system U21

Incentives on the new clean technology U22

Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

Inland

connection A3

Eco-friendly means of transport U31

Joint distribution U32

Social

circumstances A4

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41

CO2 emissions reduction policies U42

Beautiful environment construction in inner

harbors U43

41

I Determination of level I indicator weights

As the ports competitiveness evaluation indicators at this level are complex

and the elements are not easily quantified AHP is adopted to determine the

indicator weights with the basic steps as follows

(1) Establish a comparative judgment matrix The comparative judgment

matrix is obtained through comparing contributed proportion of multiple

indicators to the overall target by the judgment scale wherein the fuzzy

judgment number introduced is 1 3 5 7 and 9 and the reciprocal of

such number indicates the important degree of one element relatively to

another The results are shown in next table

Table 422 Comparison matrix of level I indicators

A1 A2 A3 A4

A1 1 15 13 3

A2 5 1 3 7

A3 3 13 1 5

A4 13 17 15 1

(2) Calculate the characteristic vector of the comparative judgment matrix

which refers to the weighted vector of the indicator The writer adopts

42

the geometric method to calculate the characteristic vector The

calculated result is as follows

ω=(012 0560 026 006)T λmax=418 It can be obtained from the table

RI=09 Wherein ω is the characteristic vector corresponding to the

maximum characteristic value λmax of the comparative judgment matrix

namely the weighted vector of the indicator RI is the average

consistency indicator as shown in following table

Table423 Average random consistency indicator RI

Matrix Order

RI

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

0 0 058 09 112 124 132 141

Matrix Order

RI

9 10 11 12 13 14 15

145 149 152 154 156 158 159

(3) Conduct consistency check on the comparative judgment matrix Adopt

the random consistency proportion CR to judge the consistency of the

comparative judgment matrix According to CI= (λmax -n)(n-1) and

CR=CIRI it can be obtained through calculation CR=007lt01 Thus

this comparative judgment matrix has a satisfactory consistency and the

indicator weight coefficient calculated through this matrix is acceptable

43

II Determination of level II indicator weights

The data at this level are the details of level Ⅰ indicator The judgment

matrix obtained through comparing multiple sub-indicators under Level Ⅰ

indicators is adopted to determine the weights of sub-indicators under each

indicator one by one The specific steps are as follows

(1) The experts score the weights within the given range To determine the

weights of several small indicators under the same big indicator it is

supposed that the score of small indicator ｋ under the indicator j made

by the expert i is Xijk wherein i=12n n is the total number of

experts ј=12m m is the total number of LevelⅡ indicator к

=12Oj Oj is the number of small indicators under the big indicator ј

іјк IJK LRC l I j k

(2) The credit rating of the expert і is l l =1 2 3 l =1 indicates this expert

is quite familiar with the evaluated contents l =2 indicator this expert is

44

with the evaluated contents l =3 indicates this expert is not quite familiar

with the evaluated contents yi1 is the=08 yi2 =05 and yi3=1

(3) The comprehensive evaluation score of small indicator l under the

indicator j is as follows

(4) The formula for normalization processing of indicator weights is as

follows and the absolute weight of the indicator set is marked as

q=(q1q2q11)

(5) Because of the same justification and principle we donrsquot give the detail

about the calculation The same with the level Ⅰ calculation we

manipulation data one by one and get 14 results And obtain the average

45

results by weighted average method The results detail as Table for the

final weights of Level-Ⅱ evaluation indicators

Above the calculation process and method are just one of data from the

questionable surveys In this study the final results are got from the

weighted average by the results of each questionable survey

The final results are shown as Table424

Table424 Indicator weights table of indicator system

Level I

indicators Weight LevelⅡ indicators

Relative

weight

Absolute

weight

Importance

percentage

Port Facilities

A1 02735

e-RTGC U11 05506 01506 1506

AMP U12 01648 00451 451

AGV U13 02826 00773 773

Port Rates and

Charges A2

02902

Green ship certification s

ystem U21 04724 01371 1371

Incentives on the new

clean technology U22 02871 00833 833

Green Flag (speed

reduction incentive)U23 02405 00698 698

Inland

connection A3

02865

Eco-friendly means of

transport U31 05942 01702 1702

Joint distribution U32 04058 01163 1163

Social

environmentA4 00863

Cost on amount of CO2

emission U41 03698 00319 319

CO2 emissions reduction

policies U42 02273 00196 196

Beautiful environment

construction in inner

harbors U43

04029 00348 348

46

III Case study

In the questionable survey we also got the mark of Green Port measures

evaluation value of many main ports such as Singapore Port Shanghai Port

Hongkong Port Busan Port LALB Port Rotterdam Port and Yocohama Port

The highest mark is 5 and lowest one is 1

Table425 Evaluation value of many main ports

Singapore

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

LALB

Port

Rotterdam

Port

Yocohama

Port

Port facilities 38000 36000 34000 38182 38000 42000 32000

Port rates and

charges 32000 36000 31000 35455 32000 39000 33000

Inland

connection 39000 34545 35000 29091 35000 45000 36000

Social

circumstance 42000 32727 41000 32000 38000 42727 36000

With the Green Port and Port competitiveness indicator weights results these

ports got the final evaluation value

47

Table426 Final evaluation value on main ports Green Port measures and

competitiveness

Rotterdam

Port

Singapore

Port

LALB

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

Yocohama

Port

394 345 330 330 319 318 317

43 Results Analysis

From the results table we can obtain the many results as following

① The main Green Port measures which are more important to improve port

competitiveness are Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system the indicator weights are 01702 01506 and

01371 among the 11 indicators

② In the Green Port construction Cost on amount of CO2 emission and CO2

emissions reduction policies are the restrictions indicators but the weight

of two indicators are not big 00319 and 00196 So effect on Green Port

construction to port competitiveness does have the weaken capacity but

not clearly strengthen more clearly Thus Green Port construction really

could improve the port competitiveness

48

③ In the case study traditional ports Rotterdam and Singapore Port give us

better examples on Green Port construction especially Rotterdam Port

④ Hongkong Busan and Yocohama Port all got a lower evaluation value

But in detail Hongkong and Yocohama Port got a lower on the port

facilities and rates and charges Busan Port got a higher on the port

facilities and rates and charges but a lower on the inland connection and

social circumstance

⑤ Shanghai Port doesnrsquot have Particular strength factors but the

comprehensive strength is not bad the same as LALB Port

49

Chapter 5 Conclusion

In this thesis the effects of Green Port construction for improving the port

competitiveness have been studied Under the definition of Green Port the

characteristics of Green Port and its effects has been shown by analysing the AHP

method which based on the questionary survey for Green Port specialists and port

officers

Follow the results of analysis on Green Port competitiveness AHP model

Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green ship certification system is

better for Green Port Construction welcome for shipping companies and citizens

who live around the port And in the analysis of Port competitiveness factors port

rates and charges always affects port competitiveness a lot As a trend inland

connection factor abstracts more attention of shipping companies

50

On the trend of port department each port should take a activity to adjust

strategy for improving its competitiveness Such as in the main ports evaluation

Busan port get a high value on port rates and charges and port facilities but as a

lower value on inland connection factor the final value is not as well as we look

forward In the evaluation of Singapore Port through it gets a lower value on rates

and charges higher value on inland connection and social circumstance causes the

final value are better So the Green Port Construction may be a trend in port

department

In the results of this thesis Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system are better solutions for Green Port Construction And

especially it can be verified that the port rates and charges always affects port

competitiveness Futhermore the investment for Green Port construction and its

effects have to be verified in the future

51

References

1 Hoyle B S and Smith J 1992 Transport and Development In Modern

transport geography edited by B S Hoyle R D Knowles (London Belhaven

Press)pp11-31

2 Beresford A K C De Souza A J R G and Pettit S J 2005 Stategic

development of liner shipping companies and terminal operators Ocean yearbook

19(Chicago 1L The University of Chicago Press) pp 732-750

3 Heaver T D 2002 Supply chain and logistics management implications for

liner shipping In The handbook of maritime economics and business edited by C

Grammenos (LondonLLP) pp 375-396

4 Park T E (2011) A Study on selection criteria of Green Port and evaluation of

major Korean port A masters thesis of graduate school of Incheon university

52

5 JeongBH (2009)Green port management policy directions in the green

growth era- The case of Gwangyang port in Republic of Korea Journal of Korea

Port Economic Association Vol25(3) p361-384

6 Lee J S Han N H(2009) A study on Green Port Revitalization According to

Air Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

7 Lee Y K Nan J W(2010)Green Logistics Policy Analysis and Implications

of Japan

8 Lee B S (2010)Tendency and Countermeasures on Green Logistics in Port

Logistics Company A masters thesis of graduate school of Korean Maritime

university

9 Lee J S (2009) A Study on Green Port Revitalization According to Air

Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

10 Zhang F Y Li Z Lu X J Yao X L(2008)Competitiveness of Inland

Ports Based on F-AHP

11 Port of Long Beach (2009) Green Port Policy wwwpolbcom

12 The port of Los Angeles wwwportoflosangelesorg

IV

Acknowledgement

I sincerely would like to appreciate my supervisor Professor Kim

Hwan-Seong With his help and constant encouragement whether study or daily

life I successfully complete my master course in Department of Logistics His

strict academic attitude and enthusiasm deeply impressed me and helped me to

archive success in research and study

I am grateful to Professor Nam Ki-Chan Logistics System and

Transportation Planning Professor Kwak Kyu-Seok Port Logistics and Social

Engineering Professor Shin Jae-Yeong Management Science and Logistics

Information System They all helped me immeasurably in detailing comments

I also would like to thank to all the members of Logistic Automation Lab

for giving me a helpful active and comfortable environment Ms Jo Min-Ji Mr

Tran Ngoc Hoang Son Mr Lim Chang-Won Mr Tran Xuan Thuong Mr Park

U-Seok Ms Lee Myung-Hwa

I also would like to give special thanks to my parents for their love

supporting me all the time and Korean and Chinese friends for their friendliness

sharing and confidence Ms Jeong Eun-Sil Mr Kim Jong-Hak Mr Lim

Jin-Gang Mr Chen Chao Mr Miao Yu Ms Guan Xin Ms Tian Mingbo and so

on

Korea Maritime University Busan Korea

June 30th 2011

Wang Liru

V

The Effects of Green Port Construction for

Improving the Port Competitiveness

Wang Liru

Department of Logistics

Graduate School of Korea Maritime University 2011

Abstract

According to increase the economy development the global warming and the

environment pollution are the greatest problems in the world Since ltKyoto

protocolgt has been brought out in 1990 citizens pay more attention to climate

change and environment protection By the trend of environment protection port

department makes a great effort on green port construction against the pollution

The aim of this study is concerns with the effects of Green Port construction for

improving the port competitiveness First of all the definition of Green Port is

described and its main characteristics are shown by using four classifications

VI

Second the measure factors for Green Port construction is suggested by through

the previous literature reviews and an evaluation model is designed

To evaluate the Green Port construction the questionary survey for Green Port

specialists and port officers is achieved And the effect factors for Green Port

construction are obtained by using AHP(Analytic Hierarchy Process) method

Last the relationship between Green Port construction and port competitiveness is

verified by analyzing the effect factors Thus the port competitiveness would be

improved by construction of Green Port

VII

항만경쟁력 강화를 위한 그린포트 구축효과 분석

Wang Liru

물류시스템공학과

한국해양대학교 대학원

국문초록

2009 년 세계 경제 위기 이후 회복세로 바뀜에 의해 항만산업의 물동량이

증가하고 선박의 대형화 및 신속화가 점차 가속화됨에 따라 항만 시장도

경쟁이 치열할 것으로 전망되어진다

한편 교토의정서가 공식 발효됨에 따라 각국에서는 대기오염에 대한 관심이

증가되고 있으며 CO2 배출량에 대한 감축 목표를 설정할 정도로 대기오염을

방지하는 자구책을 강구하고 있다 이에 따라 항만에서도 그린포트로의

전환이 불가피한 실정이다

따라서 본 연구에서는 그린포트구축 활동을 항만의 경쟁력관점에서

고찰하여 각 특징을 분석한다 또한 전문가의 설문조사를 행하고 이에 대한

VIII

AHP 분석을 통하여 그린포트 구축 활동간의 우선순위를 도출하며 구축결과가

항만의 경쟁력에 어떠한 영향을 미칠 것인지를 고찰한다

IX

List of Figures

Figure 11 Research Process 4

Figure 21 Green Port appearance and basic definition 10

Figure 41 Green Port Competitiveness AHP model 38

X

List of Tables

Table 211 Objective of CO2 reduces in main countries 8

Table 221 4kinds Green Port construction promote directions 11

Table 231 Details of LALB Port Green Port Promotion Programs 13

Table 232 Short term and Long term Green Port Plans in Auckland Port 16

Table 233 Summary of the Main Port of Green Port Measures 21

Table 241 Green Port measures in port each department 23

Table 311 Prevention literature research results 27

Table 312 Literature research in Korean academia 28

Table 321 Main factor in the Pretentious Research 31

Table 421 Details of Level I and Level II values 40

Table 422 Comparison matrix of level I indicators 41

Table 423 Average random consistency indicator RI 42

Table 424 Indicator weights table of indicator system 45

Table 425 Evaluation value of many main ports 46

Table 426 Final evaluation value on main ports Green Port measures and

competitiveness 47

XI

CONTENT

Abstract V

List of Figures IX

List of Tables X

Chapter 1 Introduction 1

11 Research background and objective 1

12 Scope and structure of research 3

Chapter 2 Green Port Construction Situation 6

21 Green Port Construction Background 6

22 The Definition of Green Port 9

23 Green Port Construction Situation in major countries 12

24 Green Port Indicators Research 22

Chapter 3 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green Port

Construction 24

31 Port Competitiveness Literature Review 24

32 Port Competitiveness Development Tree 30

33 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green Port

Construction 32

Chapter 4 The Green Port Competitiveness Analysis 36

41 The Green Port Competitiveness Model by AHP 36

42 Green Port Competitiveness Analysis 38

XII

43 Results Analysis 47

Chapter 5 Conclusion 49

References 51

1

Chapter 1 Introduction

11 Research background and objective

The Kyoto Protocol is an international agreement linked to the United Nations

Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) The major feature of the

Kyoto Protocol is that it sets binding targets for 37 industrialized countries and the

European community for reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to fight

global warming These amounts will be lower an average of five per cent based on

1990 levels over the five-year period 2008-2012 The protocol was initially

adopted on 11 December 1997 in Japan but entered into force on 16 February

2005 As of July 2010 191 countries and states have signed and ratified the

protocol

2

After ltKyoto Protocolgt has brought out in 1997 more and more people put

their attention on environment pollution Rapid development in industry

department brings out air water soil noise and wildlife pollution and destruction

As the health development of economic alleviating environmental pollution and

restoring original ecology extremely necessary

Focus on the long-term and future development in the port many counties

government and ports authorities pay attentions on Green Port construction

In the short term C40 World Ports Climate Conference draws up some

adaptive plans among big cities and major ports The plans include the incentives

provided to green ship user cooperation among the C40 member ports

encouragement to develop and utilize the Alternative Maritime Power and so on

In EU Green Port major policies is prohibition the ship utilization on fuel

which sulfur content over 2 (after Jun2010 the limitation of sulfur content is

1) There are also Marco Polo I and Marco Polo II plans in EU In Marco Polo I

Modal Shift Action Catalyst Action and Common Learning Action are included

from 2003 to 2006 And after 2007 in Marco II Motorways of the Sea Action

Traffic Avoidance Actions and Rail Synergy are added

In US people pay more attention to developing the new technology for

reducing CO2 emission Such as power generator and renewable resources and

Northwest Ports Clean Air Strategy

3

Compared with other departments green policy in port department is explained

as green maritime and green shipping For example super-eco ship building and

Modal Shift promotion

The same aim to Hong Kong Ports AMP E-RTG hybrid truck bio-diesel

recycling energy CNG LNG and development are in utilization

ldquoGreen Growth Policyrdquo is the measure which brought out by the Korean

government Follow this strategy Korean port authority also takes out the ldquoGreen

Port building comprehensive planrdquo Furthermore low carbon self-sufficiency port

the disaster safety port eco-friendly port and resource recycling port are the

understandings on the Korean ldquoGreen Growth Policyrdquo

As the port support policies being changed port competitiveness factors are

changed Especially the importance degree of each factor has been changed a

lot The purpose of this study is explaining the competitiveness effects changed

which taking Green Port measures and programs port and give a better advice and

suggestion to Green Port construction

12 Scope and structure of research

The method to analysis the effects of Green Port construction for improving

port competitiveness is AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process)

4

And research process in this study is shown in ltFigure 1gt

ltFigure 1gt Research process

In chapter 1 research background and objective research method and process

are included And chapter 2 introduces the Green Port construction background

definition the Green Port construction situation in many countries and each

department introduction in Green Port construction The chapter 3 views the

literature on port competitiveness and obtains the influence factors used in this

study trend and relationship between port competitiveness The chapter 4 based

5

on the survey data and calculates each indicator importance degree by AHP

method and analysis the result Finally in chapter 5 the conclusion summary the

whole study by the result analysis

6

Chapter 2 Green Port Construction Situation

21 Green Port Construction Background

As the United Nations Secretary General has said the greatest challenge which

we are facing is environmental regulators It is a growing crisis with economic

health and safety food production security and other dimensions

The Kyoto Protocol is an international agreement linked to the United Nations

Framework Convention on Climate Change The major feature of the Kyoto

Protocol is that it sets binding targets for 37 industrialized countries and the

European community for reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to fight

global warming These amount to an average of five percent bellow 1990 level

over the five-year period 2008-2012

The protocol was initially adopted on 11 December 1997 in Japan but all of the

member countries entered into force on16 February 2005 The Kyoto Protocol

7

was adopted in Kyoto Japan on 11 December 1997 and entered into force on 16

February 2005 The detailed rules for the implementation of the Protocol were

adopted at COP 7 in Marrakesh in 2001 and are called the ldquoMarrakesh Accordsrdquo

Follow the ltKyoto Protocolgt several flexible mechanisms are allowed Such

as emissions trading the clean development mechanism (CDM) and joint

implementation The mechanisms allow AnnexⅠcounties to meet their GHG

emission limitations by purchasing GHG emission reductions credits from

elsewhere through financial exchanges projects that reduce emissions in

non-Annex Ⅰ countries or Annex Ⅰ countries with excess allowances The

mechanisms help stimulate green investment and help Parties meet their emission

targets in a cost-effective way

Therefore many countries take action on reducing the GHG discharge emission

For example increase the energy utilization efficiency develop the solar power

wind energy tidal energy and other clean energy in their industry The details

about objective of GHG emission reduction in main countries are displayed as the

following ltTable 1gt

8

ltTable 1gt Objective of CO2 reduce in main countries

Bench

mark of

Year

Objective

()

Absolute

quantity

()

Remark

EU 1990 20~30 -20~-30 Norway New Zealand 40 reducing

USA 2005 17 -3 Passed by House of Representatives

Japan 1990 25 -25 On the premise of attention with China

India

Korea 2020

(BAU) 30 mdashmdash

Discharge amount is up to 564million don

in estimation

China 2005 40~50 60~150

(2005) Each GDP

India 2005 20-25 mdashmdash With the developed countries

participation

Russia 1990 25 -25 Be neutral country

Norway 1990 30~40 -30~-40 mdashmdash

New

Zealand 1990 10~20 -10~ -20 mdashmdash

Austria 2000 5~25 -3~-11 mdashmdash

Canada 2003 20 -3 mdashmdash

Mexico 2002 50 mdashmdash With the developed countries

participation

South

Africa

2020

(BAU) 34 mdashmdash

With the developed countries

participation

Brazil 2020

(BAU) 36~39

-20

(2005) mdashmdash

(Korean Maritime Institute 20095)

9

22 The Definition of Green Port

As the global warming affecting in the world climate has been heavily changed

natural disaster frequently occurred natural resources depletion and supply

imbalance cause crisis to reach a high level For the purpose of getting away from

financial crisis and creating the new growth motivity the counties in the world

make more efforts on developing economic

Because of the realization of this global climate and environment crisis Korean

government had brought out the ldquoGreen Growth Policyrdquo And it made the ldquoGreen

Growth Policyrdquo be embodied and law-governed announced ldquoLow Carbon Green

Growth of the Basic Lawrdquo

In order to coordinate with this policy and law build up the ldquoGreen Growthrdquo

everyone make their efforts and reach ldquoGreen Growthrdquo in Korea each department

As a important industry department port authority also take activity to match the

national strategy of ldquoGreen Growthrdquo and draw up the plan on ldquoGreen Portrdquo

construction

However there isnrsquot a clear definition about the Green Port Korean Land

Transport and Maritime Ministry have explained the Green Port as follows Green

house gas Reducing Energy Effciencing Nature-friendly Port The explanation is

very easy to understand but from a professional point of view it not very

10

comprehensive and concrete So we have to understand the concept in the Green

Port Construction measures and programs There are about 4 kind explanation and

promotion programs in the Green Port Respectively the port which based on

green technology and green business creating new growth motive improving

living standards jumping in the ranks of the advanced port

ltFigure 2gt Green Port appearance and basic definition

In the Green Growth National Strategy Policy there are 10 pieces of policy

directions and 50 researches each department should choose the appropriate one

Follow these researches chose by port availability especially Low Carbon

11

Self-sufficiency Port The Disaster Safety Port Eco-friendly Port Resource

Recycling Port and in this study Green Port construction is a plan on

comprehensive and mix of 4kinds of Green Port Construction

Table 221 Four Promotions for Green Port Construction

Promotion Program

(Green Port type) Activities

Low-Carbon

Self-Sufficiency Port

Eco-friendly inland transportation system building

New renewable resources power equipment utilization

AMP LED utilization

The Disaster Safety

Port

Disaster Prevention environment infrastructure building

Disaster prediction and corresponding system utilization

Eco-Friendly Port Beauty the port by green park planting and so on

Provide eco-friendly port building programs

Resource Recycling

Port

Port waste (silt soil) effectively recycling system

Establish resource recycling port paragon

As table1 shown each type of Green Port has a separate emphasis

Eco-friendly inland transportation system which encourages utilizing rail canal

barge clean system reduces the truck application amount AMP means

Alternative Maritime Power supply system replaces with ship power generation

The Green Port construction in most of counties is the low-carbon self-sufficiency

12

port And in their construction maybe add a few other type promote director like

beauty the port by green park planting and so on

However in this study the Green Port concept is a comprehensive plan among

4 types not a specialization system

23 Green Port Construction Situation in major countries

After ltKyoto protocolgt having brought out each department began to take

affords on the reducing the GHG (greenhouse gas) emission In port department

the activities are embodied in the Green Port construction In this study many

major ports in US EU Japan and Korea are chose to explain for research

231 US

① LALB Port

In order to achieve to reduce marine pollutants standby and build clean port

LALB Port standby resource ministry and environment protection ministry

signed a 5year plan on clean standby action cooperation

This promotion business plan set a set of marine pollutants standby emission

limitation on the ship department from the statistics year 2006-2007 to 2010-2011

handling department heavy duty equipment truck department and so on Such as

13

in Green Port Technology construction department measures and programs are

shown in following Table

Table231 the details of LALB Port Green Port Promotion Programs

Promotion Program

Heavy Equipment Truck

Heavy Equipment

Replace and Update Aging Facilities

Substitute Fuels and Clean Fuel Incentives

Budgetary for the Development of Substitute Fuels

Marine Vessels Tugs

Ship Speed Reduction within the Port

Electrical supply of parking in the Berth

Use low-sulfur fuel (supplementary motor)

Handling Equipment

Air Quality Monitoring

Measure ambient air pollution levels in the vicinity of

the Port

Include a number of real-time air quality measurements

On the restrict situation of heavy equipment trucks and others vessels must to

be replaced and rebuilt in order to minimum the emission of NOx And the trucks

which donrsquot reach the regulate standard do not allowed to get in the port These

regulations will help their owner to replace and update trucks and also set up a

replacement plan to 16000 aging trucks make the replace done by 2012 As

foundation repaired the cargo owner must to pay an addition tax about 20ft 35$

40ft 79$

14

In the maritime department the speed reduction incentive took action in

Jan2005 When ship entry into the port boundary speed must be reduced under

20 miles 12kont At the beginning the effect of this plan is very clearly so the

limitation may be raised to 40mile And AMP (Alternative Maritime Power ) is

encouraged to be built and developed as to ship use their engine and get GHG

emission

② New York- New Jersey Port

The New York- New Jersey Port Authority brought out environment policy on

CO2 emission reduction The main concepts as following first reduce PX SOX

3 each year and CO2 5 Second ship must utilize sulfur-low fuel as a

obligation Third AMP is provided Forth modern the unloading and loading

equipment must be built Fifth promote trucks replacement Sixth reform the ship

engine Seventh invent 9 billion dollars in the following 10 years Eighth invent

to all hybrid equipment (325) Ninth install the hybrid truck in AMPT and

NYCT

③ Seattle Port

15

In Seattle Port Air Environment Maritime Improvement plan has been

accepted in 2005 The plan includes first set up Puget Sound Maritime Air

Forum and make one AMP provide services for two tour ships second change

the diesel hybrid equipment into electric utilization Third use bio-diesel and

diesel catalyst and reduce the emission Forth emphasize the standard and plan of

truck minimum the idling time

Seattle Port Tacoma Port and Vancouver made a assignment and promote

ldquoNorthwest Ports Clean Air Strategyrdquo

④ Auckland Port

Auckland Port set up the aging replacement plan in 2008 and invent 20 milion

dollars gas emission should reach the level And cargo transport system in port

hinterland port authority and Air environment management committee make

cooperation and give an incentive to truck which use new clean technology

Table232 Short term and Long term Green Port Plans in Auckland Port

16

17

232 EU

Rotterdam Port

As the biggest Port in EU Rotterdam Port takes more affords in reducing the

CO2 emission Main programs are low carbon footprint AMP and so on The

limitation of CO2 emission reduces down 50 of 1990 by 2025

In July 2008 the authority of Rotterdam port gave international cooperation

with other ports an extra boost by organizing the World Ports Climate Conference

During this conference the authority of Rotterdam discussed possible ways in

which ports and business could reduce air pollution and CO2 emissions The

proposals the authority of Rotterdam was set out in a declaration which was

supported by all 55 port cities attending the conference The conference resulted

in five projects to improve air quality and reduce CO2 emissions The authority of

Rotterdam is behind the project to further elaborate an Environmental Ship Index

The Rotterdam Climate Initiative is a joint venture with the municipality of

Rotterdam DCMR Environmental Protection Agency Rijnmond and Deltalinqs

Common goal is to halve CO2 emissions in the region by 2025 in comparison with

1990 levels In connection with the Rotterdam Climate Initiative the port works

on (together with DCMR and others) creating an infrastructure for the capture

18

transport and storage of CO2 A business case presented in the summer of 2008 is

now being elaborated into a business plan The business case concludes that

Rotterdam can begin in 2015 with the capture transport and underground storage

of five million tons of CO2 per annum This means that the basic infrastructure

will then be in place for further growth in capture and storage to twenty million

tons in 2025

In 2008 a start was made on the development of a sustainability index for

activities relating to the P for Planet (environment) In 2009 it will further expand

the index to cover the P for People and the P for Profit In the first phase of the

sustainability index CO2 footprint sustainable purchasing sustainable building

and sustainable land allocation will be covered

233 Japan

① Tacoma Port

In the Tacoma Port there are some programs on protecting the air water and

soil environment

In the air protection department ldquoNorthwest Ports Clean Air Strategyrdquo

ldquoGreen Gateway for Traderdquo and ldquoTruck Programrdquo had brought out to against air

pollution The concepts include using ultra-low sulfur diesel bio-diesel and other

cleaner-burning fuels in cargo-handling equipment using low-sulfur distillate

19

fuels at berth adding ldquogreen designrdquo environmental features to ships including

diesel-electric motors that save up to 30 percent in fuel and significantly reduce

emissions setting targets to change older less-efficient truck engines installing

anti-idling devices on rail-switching engines as well as partnering on other

innovative technological advance

The Port of Tacomarsquos four dockside rail yards move cargo quickly and

efficiently from container terminals They also reduce the number of trucks on

city streets and highways Each full train that leaves the Port represents 250 to 300

trucks not on our roads reducing roadway congestion and diesel emissions The

lowest emission route to ship cargo from Asia to the US Midwest is through the

Puget Sound according to the results of a study by Herbert Engineering released

in May 2009

And in the land protection program there are successful clean projects open

spaces and future habitat restoration In 2007 the Port purchased about 70 acres

of open space known as Juliarsquos Gulch and Storey Pit located between the

Tideflats and residential Northeast Tacoma Monitor water quality system is in

utilization in the water department in Tacoma Port

② Tokyo Port

In the Tokyo Port Green Port programs are almost similar with Tacoma Port

e-RTGC (Rubber Tired Gantry Crane) the barge between Tokyo and Yocohama

20

which shorten international maritime container cargo transportation land distance

super eco-shipbuilding technology dissemination and promotion green business

certification operation and shippers and logistics companies support cooperation

③ Osaka Port and Hakata Port

AMP electrical power equipment and solar power equipment are in utilization in

Osaka Port E-RTGC and solar power of refrigerated container are in utilization in

the Hakata Port

234 Korea

In Busan Port a set of Green Port took implementation such as LNG truck

E-RTGC equipment utilization eco-friendly transport means conversion (rail

canal barge) and GHG emission reduction obligation Table233

21

ltTable 233gt Summary of the Main Port of Green Port Measures

COUNTRY PORT MEASURES

US

LALB Port

Green flag AMP discharge gas reduction obligation

recommends use of alternative fuels and clean fuel

funding for the development of alternative fuels facilities

by new engine development instead of NOx emissions

green truck program (reduce70-80) low-sulfur fuel

utilization restore and revitalize the Los Cerritos

Wetlands

New York

Port

AMP modernized facilities utilization high speed hybrid

yard

Auckland

Port

Incentives on the new cleaning technology containers

transportation system

Seattle Port

AMP green ship membership Tier 4 level reducing PM

by 1994 level Smart Way program Northwest Ports

Clean Air Strategy

EU Rotterdam

Port

Clean engine (barge) green ship membership carbon

footprint calculation cruise ship which under port

authority change to use low-sulfur fuel low emission

engine development and utilization Green Award AMP

ship recycling incentives

Japan

Tokyo Port

RTGC (Rubber Tired Gantry Crane) apply for the barge

between Tokyo and Yocohama shorten international

maritime container cargo transportation land distance

super eco-shipbuilding technology dissemination and

promotion green business certification operation

shippers and logistics companies support cooperation

Osaka Port AMP electrical power equipment solar power equipment

Hakata Port E-RTGC solar power utilization in refrigerated container

Korea Busan Port

LNG truck E-RTGC eco-friendly transport means

conversion (rail canal barge) GHG emission reduction

obligation

22

24 Green Port Indicators Research

As the previous section list shown Green Port measures and programs are

substantially the same

When a ship entry in the port boundary from voyage many ports give a

incentive on shifting and utilizing sulfur-low fuel and reducing the speed under

20 miles when the ship berth in the port the alternative maritime power are

provided which replace its power generation

Next in the cargo unloading and loading department the same with above

utilization of sulfur-low fuel and electrical equipment are promoted and

eco-driving education to driver is necessary what speed is fuel fully burning and

emission minimum point

In the cargo transport department in other words truck department the

replacement on aging trucks is popular in many ports aging trucks are prohibited

close to port at the same time an incentive or support function are provided on

aging replacement The automated equipments are recommended to utilize in the

Green Port like hybrid yard tractor And a perfect plan on truck running also could

reduce the idling time and against the emission of CO2

The details reference the following Table 241

23

Table241 Green Port measures in port each department

Emission reduction programs

Ship

department

Shipping

in the

port

boundary

Obligation on the utilization of sulfur-low fuel

Reform ship engine and utilize hybrid

Speed reduce in the port entrance(a off-shore fee

incentive)

Off-shore AMP

Shift utilization system of clean fuel

Unloading and loading

department

Obligation on the utilization of sulfur-low fuel

Replace electrical equipment

Eco-driving

Truck department Hybrid yard tractor utilization

Promote aging truck replacement

Minimum the idling time

Others LED light in the Port

Develop renew and recycle resource energy

The Green Port measures in this study are e-RTGC AMP AGV Green Ship

certification system incentives on the new clean technology Green Flag(speed

reduction incentive)eco-friendly transport means conversion joint distribution

the cost on account of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction polities and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

The details and definition on each Green Port measure and the relationship with

Port Competitiveness will be expressed in next chapter

24

Chapter 3 The Relationship between Port

Competitiveness and Green Port Construction

31 Port Competitiveness Literature Review

Although past studies on port selection models have focused on port selection

made by port facilities port services port rates and charge and location

Murphy made a survey between 534 shipping companies and port authorities in

1989 and between 1850 shipping companies and port authorities in 1992

Comparing with other papers Murphys got a survey among more widely

objects In his paper port selection(port competitiveness) was seen to affected by

facilities situation appropriate pilotage max ship entrance probability the

25

capability of handling non-regular cargos whether to provide information of ship

nationality or not and port services level

In French model (1979) there are two factors affecting the port selection (port

competitiveness) endogenous factor and exogenous factor In endogenous factors

there are adequacy and physical plant condition of terminal facilities terminal rate

and charges frequency and geographic coverage of ship and freight services the

capacity of connecting to inland rails or transport net and the services provides for

the shipping or logistics And exogenous factors included the size and economic

capacity of hinterland as a source exports or market for imports national

economic situation trade policy and support established by government the

situation at home and abroad

The same as Frenchs paper in Paters paper in 1990 there are endogenous and

exogenous factors too In endogenous there are the services provides for the

shipping or logistics capacity of terminal facilities situation and condition of

facilities operation strategies established by port authority convenience to utilize

And the political situation at home and abroad social change economic factor

stabilized labor and capital However in 2004 there is a tremendous change in

Peters new paper There are four parts multi-modal process interface transport

modes infrastructure Multi-model Process part includes ship entrance rapid

speed and accuracy shipper and shipping companies reactive operation flexibility

Interface includes labor power information technology and so on And there are

26

ship calls frequency and amount of fleet factors in the transport modes part In the

infrastructure part includes port facility equipments and so on

Port facilities rates and charges services inland situation and social

circumstance factors affect the port selection and competitiveness a lot from the

research until 1992 by Murphy And in Lirn and Pater research 2003-2004 the

new and detail factors are shown to us

We can clearly see the contents in next table

27

Table 311 Prevention literature research results

Influence factors

French

(1979)

Endogenous

port facilities port rate and charges calls frequency port services

port connection with inland

Exogenous

economic size of hinterland national economic situation trade

policy home and abroad situation

Willingale

(1982)

voyage distance economy size entrance to port and route port

facilities max ship entrance probability port operation rates and

charges port authority scale of port

Slack

(1985)

cost of inland transportation port proximity ship demurrage

multi-transport

Peter

(1990)

Endogenous

port facilities condition of facilities operation strategies

convenience to utilize

Exogenous

political situation social change economic factor stabilized labor

and capital

UNCTAD

(1992)

port facilities services location level of financial industry

information communication system social circumstances economic

stability

Murphy

(1992)

facilities situation appropriate pilotage max ship entrance

probability the capability of handling non-regular cargos whether to

provide information of ship nationality or not port services level

Lirn

(2003-2004)

physical and technologic facilities geopolitical location port

operation and management shipping and terminal cost

Peter

(2004)

Multi-modal Process

ship entrance rapid speed and accuracy shipper and shipping

companies reactive operation flexibility

Interface labor and capital

Transport modes ship calls frequency and amount of fleet factors

28

And there are many experts and scholars research for the influence factors to

port selection and competitiveness in Korea The specific content follows table5

Table 312 Literature research in Korean academia

Influence factors

Jeon Il-su (1992) location facilities charges service level (EDI) terminal operation

port authority

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

( 1993 )

location facilities throughput charges service operation

situation

Kim Hak-so

(1993)

export shipping amount of annual cost of each ton of cargo

marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km of

cargo loading time

import marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km

of cargo amount of liner ship

Yeo Gi-tae (1996) location facilities throughput charge service operation situation

Ha Dong-u amp

Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

location facilities service level logistics charges environment of

logistics service

Yeo Gi-tae (1999) location facilities throughput charges service

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

throughput quay length yard area GNP

Kum Jong-su

(2001)

distance between port and cargo site terminal facilities service

the capacity of multi-transport capacity of cargo handling

administrative service rates and charges of inland transport

congestion

Yeo Gi-tae (2002) location throughput facilities service level

Kim Jin-gu (2002) port facilities location cargo amount rates and charges services

29

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005)

voyage degree to attract cargo cargo handling cost amount of

handling cargo connection to inland service reliability location

berth availability quay length feeder network depth

transshipment volumes cargo security profitability

offing degree to attract cargo berth availability cargo handling

cost transshipment volumes

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005)

cargo handling amount port facilities location rates and charges

level of service

Heo Yun-su

(2005)

port facilities rates and charges services marketing geopolitics

location economic and social circumstance

Kim Geun-seop

(2007)

port services facilities cargo handling amount location cost

productivity factor global factor

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) rates and charges services port characteristics

Many experts and scholars make a research on port selection and

competitiveness recently But the factors selection criteria are difference

Nevertheless the main factors are facilities services cost and so on

Therefore port competitiveness factors which chose in this study are port

facilities port services port rates and charges and social circumstance

However the main factors are not the whole factors any more more and more

detail factors and characteristic factors appearance Port selection and

competitiveness factors have changed And the development content is introduced

in next part

30

32 Port Competitiveness Development Tree

As mentioned above port facilities port rates and charges and port location are

the basic factors in the port selection and competitiveness

From the following table we can discover that first one facilities rates and

charges and location are the most important factor in port selection and

competitiveness second one the importance of social circumstance turns larger

inland connection is necessary all the time

Table 321 Main factor in the Pretentious Research

31

port facilities rates and

charges

inland

connection

social

circumstance location

French (1979) radic radic radic

Wiliingale (1982) radic radic

Slack (1985) radic

Pater (1990) radic radic

UNCTAD (1992) radic radic radic

Murphy(1992) radic

Jeon Il-su (1992) radic radic radic

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

(1993)

radic radic radic

Kim Hak-so

(1993) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1996) radic radic radic

Ha Dong-u

amp Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1998) radic radic radic

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

radic

Kum Jong-su

(2001) radic radic radic radic

Kim Jin-gu(2002) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(2002) radic radic

Lirn(2003-2004) radic radic radic

Pater(2004) radic

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005) radic radic radic

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005) radic radic radic

Heo Yun-su

(2005) radic radic radic radic

Kim Geun-seop

(2007) radic radic radic radic

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) radic

32

33 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green

Port Construction

Following the research above Port facilities rates and charges inland

connection and social circumstance are chose in this study port selection and

competitiveness department

e-RTGC Electric rubber tired gantry crane is a mobile gantry crane used for

stacking intermodal containers within the stacking areas of a container terminal

e-RTGC are used at container terminals and container storage yards to straddling

multiple lanes of railroad and container storage or when maximum storage

density in the container stack is desired

AMP is shorted for Alternative Marine Power and Itrsquos a facility which

provides the electric system in the land for ship which entry in the port The

facility can reduce emissions which ship get entrance in the port

AGV is a mobile robot that follows markers or wires in the floor or uses

vision or lasers They are most often used in industrial applications to move

materials around a manufacturing facility or a warehouse Automatic Guided

Vehicle systems work around-the-clock making continuous flow and just-in-time

delivery easier to achieve Application of the automatic guided vehicle has broade

33

ned during the late 20th century and they are no longer restricted to industrial

environments

The e-RTGC AMP and AGV are the new clean facilities and equipments in the

Green Port they donrsquot reduce the efficiency of handling cargo and they also

reduce the CO2 emission account

Green ship certification system if a ship utilizes clean and CO2 emission

reduction technology on the ship building adds equipment and management and

son on certification would be received And the port authority gives some

incentive and preferential treatment among 45 ports Such as a better schedule is

provided for green membership ship priority in handing cargo and discount on

entrance fee

Incentives on the new cleaning technology There are two expressions about

this measure one is that the port authority give a incentive to ship which have a

great utilization on the new cleaning technology and the other one is that

environment provide many incentives to the authority which utilize the new

cleaning technology in the port such as LED street lamp solar power cranes

Green flag The Green Flag incentive program was set up to encourage ships to

slow down in order to improve air quality The Green Flag program provides

approximately $2 million a year in discounts for vessel operators who slow their

ships to 12 knots (22kmh) or less within 20miles (32km) of the harbor

34

According to the Port the Green Flag program reduced air pollution by 600tons in

2007 and is expected to do better in 2008

All of Green ship certification system incentives on the new cleaning

technology and Green Flag are incentives provided for users of port and aimed at

reduce port rates and charges So the 3 measures belong to affect port rates and

charges

Eco-friendly transport means conversion Eco-friendly means of transport are

much accounted of green port for example railway discharge less GHG emission

than truck barge with a clean engine among the river and inshore canal

Joint distribution joint distribution is a collaborative system which port

provides among many logistics companies It can make the cargo handling speed

rapidly and reduce cargo storage time for CO2 emission reducing such as

refrigerated container In an addition it also makes the logistics companies

transport more efficient

Cost on amount of CO2 emission differenced from other port the cost on

amount of CO2 is included in the port cost The cost aims to reduce the CO2

emission directly

CO2 emission reduction policies compared with other traditional port Green

Port gives more cost discount and incentives but in an addition there are many

policies on CO2 emission restriction Such as aging trucks restrictions in inland

transport department ship entry speed reduced and fuel changed in the ship

35

department and so on Whether these restriction policies constrain port

development or not and the degree of these policies constrain port development

will be explain by the AHP results

Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors some ports in the

western countries are opened as a travel place for visitors so as to change the

polluted impress and raise the position in our heart

Cost on amount of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction policies and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors can affect the social

circumstance factor Whether these measures can or not improve the social

circumstance and port competitiveness we have to see the next calculation and

results

36

Chapter 4 The Green Port Competitiveness

Analysis

41 The Green Port Competitiveness Model by AHP

The AHP is one multi-criteria decision making method which has been

extensively applied to a variety of decision-making situations The multi-criteria

techniques are considered to be a promising framework for evaluation of

decision-making factors since they have the potential to take into account

conflicting multidimensional incommensurable and uncertain effects of

decisions explicitly

In order to apply the AHP method a hierarchical decision schema was

constructed by decomposing the decision problem into its decision elements

37

After that the importance or preferences of the decision elements are examined in

a pair-wise comparison to the elements in the hierarchy The parameters are

estimated using pair-wise comparisons between the importance of the attribute or

decision element in the function using data made by each responder Making

comparisons is a question of which of the two attributes is more import as well as

how much more important

Follow these theories the Green Port Competitiveness Model choose factors as

follow in port competitiveness factors part there are port facilities port rates and

charges inland connection social circumstance in Green Port construction part

there are e-RTGC AMP AGV green ship certification system green flag

incentives on the new cleaning technology eco-friendly transport means

conversion joint distribution CO2 emission reduction policies cost on amount of

CO2 emission beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

38

Figure 41 Green Port Competitiveness AHP model

Follow the Green Port Competitiveness AHP as shown we set a questionnaire

survey to many experts scholars working in logistics system area And we got 15

ones and 14 ones results are believable and integrated

42 Green Port Competitiveness Analysis

39

The key to construction of the factors which affects the port competitiveness

is to determine the conceptual model The selection of the factors directly affects

the evaluation of the result In order to ensure the accuracy objectivity and

practicality of evaluation results the following basic principles must be followed

when selecting factors systematic principles the principle of universal

comparability practical principle and goal-oriented principle In view of the

foregoing the competitiveness which affected by Green Port construction model

is made The analysis follows established principles of port competitiveness

evaluation taking into account the characteristics and functions of the port as well

as port facilities port services port rates and charges ship entrance inland

connection social circumstances and so on

(1) Port facilities

e-RTGC U11 AMP U12 AGV U13

(2) Port rates and charges

Green ship certification system U21 Incentives on the new clean

technology U22 Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

(3) Inland connection

Eco-friendly means of transport U31 Joint distribution U32

(4) Social circumstances

40

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41 CO2 emission reduction policies

U42 Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors U43

Table 421 Details of Level I and Level II values

Level I

indicators Symbol Level II indicators Symbol

Port facilities A1

e-RTGC U11

AMP U12

AGV U13

Port rates and

charges A2

Green ship certification system U21

Incentives on the new clean technology U22

Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

Inland

connection A3

Eco-friendly means of transport U31

Joint distribution U32

Social

circumstances A4

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41

CO2 emissions reduction policies U42

Beautiful environment construction in inner

harbors U43

41

I Determination of level I indicator weights

As the ports competitiveness evaluation indicators at this level are complex

and the elements are not easily quantified AHP is adopted to determine the

indicator weights with the basic steps as follows

(1) Establish a comparative judgment matrix The comparative judgment

matrix is obtained through comparing contributed proportion of multiple

indicators to the overall target by the judgment scale wherein the fuzzy

judgment number introduced is 1 3 5 7 and 9 and the reciprocal of

such number indicates the important degree of one element relatively to

another The results are shown in next table

Table 422 Comparison matrix of level I indicators

A1 A2 A3 A4

A1 1 15 13 3

A2 5 1 3 7

A3 3 13 1 5

A4 13 17 15 1

(2) Calculate the characteristic vector of the comparative judgment matrix

which refers to the weighted vector of the indicator The writer adopts

42

the geometric method to calculate the characteristic vector The

calculated result is as follows

ω=(012 0560 026 006)T λmax=418 It can be obtained from the table

RI=09 Wherein ω is the characteristic vector corresponding to the

maximum characteristic value λmax of the comparative judgment matrix

namely the weighted vector of the indicator RI is the average

consistency indicator as shown in following table

Table423 Average random consistency indicator RI

Matrix Order

RI

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

0 0 058 09 112 124 132 141

Matrix Order

RI

9 10 11 12 13 14 15

145 149 152 154 156 158 159

(3) Conduct consistency check on the comparative judgment matrix Adopt

the random consistency proportion CR to judge the consistency of the

comparative judgment matrix According to CI= (λmax -n)(n-1) and

CR=CIRI it can be obtained through calculation CR=007lt01 Thus

this comparative judgment matrix has a satisfactory consistency and the

indicator weight coefficient calculated through this matrix is acceptable

43

II Determination of level II indicator weights

The data at this level are the details of level Ⅰ indicator The judgment

matrix obtained through comparing multiple sub-indicators under Level Ⅰ

indicators is adopted to determine the weights of sub-indicators under each

indicator one by one The specific steps are as follows

(1) The experts score the weights within the given range To determine the

weights of several small indicators under the same big indicator it is

supposed that the score of small indicator ｋ under the indicator j made

by the expert i is Xijk wherein i=12n n is the total number of

experts ј=12m m is the total number of LevelⅡ indicator к

=12Oj Oj is the number of small indicators under the big indicator ј

іјк IJK LRC l I j k

(2) The credit rating of the expert і is l l =1 2 3 l =1 indicates this expert

is quite familiar with the evaluated contents l =2 indicator this expert is

44

with the evaluated contents l =3 indicates this expert is not quite familiar

with the evaluated contents yi1 is the=08 yi2 =05 and yi3=1

(3) The comprehensive evaluation score of small indicator l under the

indicator j is as follows

(4) The formula for normalization processing of indicator weights is as

follows and the absolute weight of the indicator set is marked as

q=(q1q2q11)

(5) Because of the same justification and principle we donrsquot give the detail

about the calculation The same with the level Ⅰ calculation we

manipulation data one by one and get 14 results And obtain the average

45

results by weighted average method The results detail as Table for the

final weights of Level-Ⅱ evaluation indicators

Above the calculation process and method are just one of data from the

questionable surveys In this study the final results are got from the

weighted average by the results of each questionable survey

The final results are shown as Table424

Table424 Indicator weights table of indicator system

Level I

indicators Weight LevelⅡ indicators

Relative

weight

Absolute

weight

Importance

percentage

Port Facilities

A1 02735

e-RTGC U11 05506 01506 1506

AMP U12 01648 00451 451

AGV U13 02826 00773 773

Port Rates and

Charges A2

02902

Green ship certification s

ystem U21 04724 01371 1371

Incentives on the new

clean technology U22 02871 00833 833

Green Flag (speed

reduction incentive)U23 02405 00698 698

Inland

connection A3

02865

Eco-friendly means of

transport U31 05942 01702 1702

Joint distribution U32 04058 01163 1163

Social

environmentA4 00863

Cost on amount of CO2

emission U41 03698 00319 319

CO2 emissions reduction

policies U42 02273 00196 196

Beautiful environment

construction in inner

harbors U43

04029 00348 348

46

III Case study

In the questionable survey we also got the mark of Green Port measures

evaluation value of many main ports such as Singapore Port Shanghai Port

Hongkong Port Busan Port LALB Port Rotterdam Port and Yocohama Port

The highest mark is 5 and lowest one is 1

Table425 Evaluation value of many main ports

Singapore

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

LALB

Port

Rotterdam

Port

Yocohama

Port

Port facilities 38000 36000 34000 38182 38000 42000 32000

Port rates and

charges 32000 36000 31000 35455 32000 39000 33000

Inland

connection 39000 34545 35000 29091 35000 45000 36000

Social

circumstance 42000 32727 41000 32000 38000 42727 36000

With the Green Port and Port competitiveness indicator weights results these

ports got the final evaluation value

47

Table426 Final evaluation value on main ports Green Port measures and

competitiveness

Rotterdam

Port

Singapore

Port

LALB

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

Yocohama

Port

394 345 330 330 319 318 317

43 Results Analysis

From the results table we can obtain the many results as following

① The main Green Port measures which are more important to improve port

competitiveness are Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system the indicator weights are 01702 01506 and

01371 among the 11 indicators

② In the Green Port construction Cost on amount of CO2 emission and CO2

emissions reduction policies are the restrictions indicators but the weight

of two indicators are not big 00319 and 00196 So effect on Green Port

construction to port competitiveness does have the weaken capacity but

not clearly strengthen more clearly Thus Green Port construction really

could improve the port competitiveness

48

③ In the case study traditional ports Rotterdam and Singapore Port give us

better examples on Green Port construction especially Rotterdam Port

④ Hongkong Busan and Yocohama Port all got a lower evaluation value

But in detail Hongkong and Yocohama Port got a lower on the port

facilities and rates and charges Busan Port got a higher on the port

facilities and rates and charges but a lower on the inland connection and

social circumstance

⑤ Shanghai Port doesnrsquot have Particular strength factors but the

comprehensive strength is not bad the same as LALB Port

49

Chapter 5 Conclusion

In this thesis the effects of Green Port construction for improving the port

competitiveness have been studied Under the definition of Green Port the

characteristics of Green Port and its effects has been shown by analysing the AHP

method which based on the questionary survey for Green Port specialists and port

officers

Follow the results of analysis on Green Port competitiveness AHP model

Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green ship certification system is

better for Green Port Construction welcome for shipping companies and citizens

who live around the port And in the analysis of Port competitiveness factors port

rates and charges always affects port competitiveness a lot As a trend inland

connection factor abstracts more attention of shipping companies

50

On the trend of port department each port should take a activity to adjust

strategy for improving its competitiveness Such as in the main ports evaluation

Busan port get a high value on port rates and charges and port facilities but as a

lower value on inland connection factor the final value is not as well as we look

forward In the evaluation of Singapore Port through it gets a lower value on rates

and charges higher value on inland connection and social circumstance causes the

final value are better So the Green Port Construction may be a trend in port

department

In the results of this thesis Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system are better solutions for Green Port Construction And

especially it can be verified that the port rates and charges always affects port

competitiveness Futhermore the investment for Green Port construction and its

effects have to be verified in the future

51

References

1 Hoyle B S and Smith J 1992 Transport and Development In Modern

transport geography edited by B S Hoyle R D Knowles (London Belhaven

Press)pp11-31

2 Beresford A K C De Souza A J R G and Pettit S J 2005 Stategic

development of liner shipping companies and terminal operators Ocean yearbook

19(Chicago 1L The University of Chicago Press) pp 732-750

3 Heaver T D 2002 Supply chain and logistics management implications for

liner shipping In The handbook of maritime economics and business edited by C

Grammenos (LondonLLP) pp 375-396

4 Park T E (2011) A Study on selection criteria of Green Port and evaluation of

major Korean port A masters thesis of graduate school of Incheon university

52

5 JeongBH (2009)Green port management policy directions in the green

growth era- The case of Gwangyang port in Republic of Korea Journal of Korea

Port Economic Association Vol25(3) p361-384

6 Lee J S Han N H(2009) A study on Green Port Revitalization According to

Air Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

7 Lee Y K Nan J W(2010)Green Logistics Policy Analysis and Implications

of Japan

8 Lee B S (2010)Tendency and Countermeasures on Green Logistics in Port

Logistics Company A masters thesis of graduate school of Korean Maritime

university

9 Lee J S (2009) A Study on Green Port Revitalization According to Air

Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

10 Zhang F Y Li Z Lu X J Yao X L(2008)Competitiveness of Inland

Ports Based on F-AHP

11 Port of Long Beach (2009) Green Port Policy wwwpolbcom

12 The port of Los Angeles wwwportoflosangelesorg

V

The Effects of Green Port Construction for

Improving the Port Competitiveness

Wang Liru

Department of Logistics

Graduate School of Korea Maritime University 2011

Abstract

According to increase the economy development the global warming and the

environment pollution are the greatest problems in the world Since ltKyoto

protocolgt has been brought out in 1990 citizens pay more attention to climate

change and environment protection By the trend of environment protection port

department makes a great effort on green port construction against the pollution

The aim of this study is concerns with the effects of Green Port construction for

improving the port competitiveness First of all the definition of Green Port is

described and its main characteristics are shown by using four classifications

VI

Second the measure factors for Green Port construction is suggested by through

the previous literature reviews and an evaluation model is designed

To evaluate the Green Port construction the questionary survey for Green Port

specialists and port officers is achieved And the effect factors for Green Port

construction are obtained by using AHP(Analytic Hierarchy Process) method

Last the relationship between Green Port construction and port competitiveness is

verified by analyzing the effect factors Thus the port competitiveness would be

improved by construction of Green Port

VII

항만경쟁력 강화를 위한 그린포트 구축효과 분석

Wang Liru

물류시스템공학과

한국해양대학교 대학원

국문초록

2009 년 세계 경제 위기 이후 회복세로 바뀜에 의해 항만산업의 물동량이

증가하고 선박의 대형화 및 신속화가 점차 가속화됨에 따라 항만 시장도

경쟁이 치열할 것으로 전망되어진다

한편 교토의정서가 공식 발효됨에 따라 각국에서는 대기오염에 대한 관심이

증가되고 있으며 CO2 배출량에 대한 감축 목표를 설정할 정도로 대기오염을

방지하는 자구책을 강구하고 있다 이에 따라 항만에서도 그린포트로의

전환이 불가피한 실정이다

따라서 본 연구에서는 그린포트구축 활동을 항만의 경쟁력관점에서

고찰하여 각 특징을 분석한다 또한 전문가의 설문조사를 행하고 이에 대한

VIII

AHP 분석을 통하여 그린포트 구축 활동간의 우선순위를 도출하며 구축결과가

항만의 경쟁력에 어떠한 영향을 미칠 것인지를 고찰한다

IX

List of Figures

Figure 11 Research Process 4

Figure 21 Green Port appearance and basic definition 10

Figure 41 Green Port Competitiveness AHP model 38

X

List of Tables

Table 211 Objective of CO2 reduces in main countries 8

Table 221 4kinds Green Port construction promote directions 11

Table 231 Details of LALB Port Green Port Promotion Programs 13

Table 232 Short term and Long term Green Port Plans in Auckland Port 16

Table 233 Summary of the Main Port of Green Port Measures 21

Table 241 Green Port measures in port each department 23

Table 311 Prevention literature research results 27

Table 312 Literature research in Korean academia 28

Table 321 Main factor in the Pretentious Research 31

Table 421 Details of Level I and Level II values 40

Table 422 Comparison matrix of level I indicators 41

Table 423 Average random consistency indicator RI 42

Table 424 Indicator weights table of indicator system 45

Table 425 Evaluation value of many main ports 46

Table 426 Final evaluation value on main ports Green Port measures and

competitiveness 47

XI

CONTENT

Abstract V

List of Figures IX

List of Tables X

Chapter 1 Introduction 1

11 Research background and objective 1

12 Scope and structure of research 3

Chapter 2 Green Port Construction Situation 6

21 Green Port Construction Background 6

22 The Definition of Green Port 9

23 Green Port Construction Situation in major countries 12

24 Green Port Indicators Research 22

Chapter 3 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green Port

Construction 24

31 Port Competitiveness Literature Review 24

32 Port Competitiveness Development Tree 30

33 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green Port

Construction 32

Chapter 4 The Green Port Competitiveness Analysis 36

41 The Green Port Competitiveness Model by AHP 36

42 Green Port Competitiveness Analysis 38

XII

43 Results Analysis 47

Chapter 5 Conclusion 49

References 51

1

Chapter 1 Introduction

11 Research background and objective

The Kyoto Protocol is an international agreement linked to the United Nations

Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) The major feature of the

Kyoto Protocol is that it sets binding targets for 37 industrialized countries and the

European community for reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to fight

global warming These amounts will be lower an average of five per cent based on

1990 levels over the five-year period 2008-2012 The protocol was initially

adopted on 11 December 1997 in Japan but entered into force on 16 February

2005 As of July 2010 191 countries and states have signed and ratified the

protocol

2

After ltKyoto Protocolgt has brought out in 1997 more and more people put

their attention on environment pollution Rapid development in industry

department brings out air water soil noise and wildlife pollution and destruction

As the health development of economic alleviating environmental pollution and

restoring original ecology extremely necessary

Focus on the long-term and future development in the port many counties

government and ports authorities pay attentions on Green Port construction

In the short term C40 World Ports Climate Conference draws up some

adaptive plans among big cities and major ports The plans include the incentives

provided to green ship user cooperation among the C40 member ports

encouragement to develop and utilize the Alternative Maritime Power and so on

In EU Green Port major policies is prohibition the ship utilization on fuel

which sulfur content over 2 (after Jun2010 the limitation of sulfur content is

1) There are also Marco Polo I and Marco Polo II plans in EU In Marco Polo I

Modal Shift Action Catalyst Action and Common Learning Action are included

from 2003 to 2006 And after 2007 in Marco II Motorways of the Sea Action

Traffic Avoidance Actions and Rail Synergy are added

In US people pay more attention to developing the new technology for

reducing CO2 emission Such as power generator and renewable resources and

Northwest Ports Clean Air Strategy

3

Compared with other departments green policy in port department is explained

as green maritime and green shipping For example super-eco ship building and

Modal Shift promotion

The same aim to Hong Kong Ports AMP E-RTG hybrid truck bio-diesel

recycling energy CNG LNG and development are in utilization

ldquoGreen Growth Policyrdquo is the measure which brought out by the Korean

government Follow this strategy Korean port authority also takes out the ldquoGreen

Port building comprehensive planrdquo Furthermore low carbon self-sufficiency port

the disaster safety port eco-friendly port and resource recycling port are the

understandings on the Korean ldquoGreen Growth Policyrdquo

As the port support policies being changed port competitiveness factors are

changed Especially the importance degree of each factor has been changed a

lot The purpose of this study is explaining the competitiveness effects changed

which taking Green Port measures and programs port and give a better advice and

suggestion to Green Port construction

12 Scope and structure of research

The method to analysis the effects of Green Port construction for improving

port competitiveness is AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process)

4

And research process in this study is shown in ltFigure 1gt

ltFigure 1gt Research process

In chapter 1 research background and objective research method and process

are included And chapter 2 introduces the Green Port construction background

definition the Green Port construction situation in many countries and each

department introduction in Green Port construction The chapter 3 views the

literature on port competitiveness and obtains the influence factors used in this

study trend and relationship between port competitiveness The chapter 4 based

5

on the survey data and calculates each indicator importance degree by AHP

method and analysis the result Finally in chapter 5 the conclusion summary the

whole study by the result analysis

6

Chapter 2 Green Port Construction Situation

21 Green Port Construction Background

As the United Nations Secretary General has said the greatest challenge which

we are facing is environmental regulators It is a growing crisis with economic

health and safety food production security and other dimensions

The Kyoto Protocol is an international agreement linked to the United Nations

Framework Convention on Climate Change The major feature of the Kyoto

Protocol is that it sets binding targets for 37 industrialized countries and the

European community for reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to fight

global warming These amount to an average of five percent bellow 1990 level

over the five-year period 2008-2012

The protocol was initially adopted on 11 December 1997 in Japan but all of the

member countries entered into force on16 February 2005 The Kyoto Protocol

7

was adopted in Kyoto Japan on 11 December 1997 and entered into force on 16

February 2005 The detailed rules for the implementation of the Protocol were

adopted at COP 7 in Marrakesh in 2001 and are called the ldquoMarrakesh Accordsrdquo

Follow the ltKyoto Protocolgt several flexible mechanisms are allowed Such

as emissions trading the clean development mechanism (CDM) and joint

implementation The mechanisms allow AnnexⅠcounties to meet their GHG

emission limitations by purchasing GHG emission reductions credits from

elsewhere through financial exchanges projects that reduce emissions in

non-Annex Ⅰ countries or Annex Ⅰ countries with excess allowances The

mechanisms help stimulate green investment and help Parties meet their emission

targets in a cost-effective way

Therefore many countries take action on reducing the GHG discharge emission

For example increase the energy utilization efficiency develop the solar power

wind energy tidal energy and other clean energy in their industry The details

about objective of GHG emission reduction in main countries are displayed as the

following ltTable 1gt

8

ltTable 1gt Objective of CO2 reduce in main countries

Bench

mark of

Year

Objective

()

Absolute

quantity

()

Remark

EU 1990 20~30 -20~-30 Norway New Zealand 40 reducing

USA 2005 17 -3 Passed by House of Representatives

Japan 1990 25 -25 On the premise of attention with China

India

Korea 2020

(BAU) 30 mdashmdash

Discharge amount is up to 564million don

in estimation

China 2005 40~50 60~150

(2005) Each GDP

India 2005 20-25 mdashmdash With the developed countries

participation

Russia 1990 25 -25 Be neutral country

Norway 1990 30~40 -30~-40 mdashmdash

New

Zealand 1990 10~20 -10~ -20 mdashmdash

Austria 2000 5~25 -3~-11 mdashmdash

Canada 2003 20 -3 mdashmdash

Mexico 2002 50 mdashmdash With the developed countries

participation

South

Africa

2020

(BAU) 34 mdashmdash

With the developed countries

participation

Brazil 2020

(BAU) 36~39

-20

(2005) mdashmdash

(Korean Maritime Institute 20095)

9

22 The Definition of Green Port

As the global warming affecting in the world climate has been heavily changed

natural disaster frequently occurred natural resources depletion and supply

imbalance cause crisis to reach a high level For the purpose of getting away from

financial crisis and creating the new growth motivity the counties in the world

make more efforts on developing economic

Because of the realization of this global climate and environment crisis Korean

government had brought out the ldquoGreen Growth Policyrdquo And it made the ldquoGreen

Growth Policyrdquo be embodied and law-governed announced ldquoLow Carbon Green

Growth of the Basic Lawrdquo

In order to coordinate with this policy and law build up the ldquoGreen Growthrdquo

everyone make their efforts and reach ldquoGreen Growthrdquo in Korea each department

As a important industry department port authority also take activity to match the

national strategy of ldquoGreen Growthrdquo and draw up the plan on ldquoGreen Portrdquo

construction

However there isnrsquot a clear definition about the Green Port Korean Land

Transport and Maritime Ministry have explained the Green Port as follows Green

house gas Reducing Energy Effciencing Nature-friendly Port The explanation is

very easy to understand but from a professional point of view it not very

10

comprehensive and concrete So we have to understand the concept in the Green

Port Construction measures and programs There are about 4 kind explanation and

promotion programs in the Green Port Respectively the port which based on

green technology and green business creating new growth motive improving

living standards jumping in the ranks of the advanced port

ltFigure 2gt Green Port appearance and basic definition

In the Green Growth National Strategy Policy there are 10 pieces of policy

directions and 50 researches each department should choose the appropriate one

Follow these researches chose by port availability especially Low Carbon

11

Self-sufficiency Port The Disaster Safety Port Eco-friendly Port Resource

Recycling Port and in this study Green Port construction is a plan on

comprehensive and mix of 4kinds of Green Port Construction

Table 221 Four Promotions for Green Port Construction

Promotion Program

(Green Port type) Activities

Low-Carbon

Self-Sufficiency Port

Eco-friendly inland transportation system building

New renewable resources power equipment utilization

AMP LED utilization

The Disaster Safety

Port

Disaster Prevention environment infrastructure building

Disaster prediction and corresponding system utilization

Eco-Friendly Port Beauty the port by green park planting and so on

Provide eco-friendly port building programs

Resource Recycling

Port

Port waste (silt soil) effectively recycling system

Establish resource recycling port paragon

As table1 shown each type of Green Port has a separate emphasis

Eco-friendly inland transportation system which encourages utilizing rail canal

barge clean system reduces the truck application amount AMP means

Alternative Maritime Power supply system replaces with ship power generation

The Green Port construction in most of counties is the low-carbon self-sufficiency

12

port And in their construction maybe add a few other type promote director like

beauty the port by green park planting and so on

However in this study the Green Port concept is a comprehensive plan among

4 types not a specialization system

23 Green Port Construction Situation in major countries

After ltKyoto protocolgt having brought out each department began to take

affords on the reducing the GHG (greenhouse gas) emission In port department

the activities are embodied in the Green Port construction In this study many

major ports in US EU Japan and Korea are chose to explain for research

231 US

① LALB Port

In order to achieve to reduce marine pollutants standby and build clean port

LALB Port standby resource ministry and environment protection ministry

signed a 5year plan on clean standby action cooperation

This promotion business plan set a set of marine pollutants standby emission

limitation on the ship department from the statistics year 2006-2007 to 2010-2011

handling department heavy duty equipment truck department and so on Such as

13

in Green Port Technology construction department measures and programs are

shown in following Table

Table231 the details of LALB Port Green Port Promotion Programs

Promotion Program

Heavy Equipment Truck

Heavy Equipment

Replace and Update Aging Facilities

Substitute Fuels and Clean Fuel Incentives

Budgetary for the Development of Substitute Fuels

Marine Vessels Tugs

Ship Speed Reduction within the Port

Electrical supply of parking in the Berth

Use low-sulfur fuel (supplementary motor)

Handling Equipment

Air Quality Monitoring

Measure ambient air pollution levels in the vicinity of

the Port

Include a number of real-time air quality measurements

On the restrict situation of heavy equipment trucks and others vessels must to

be replaced and rebuilt in order to minimum the emission of NOx And the trucks

which donrsquot reach the regulate standard do not allowed to get in the port These

regulations will help their owner to replace and update trucks and also set up a

replacement plan to 16000 aging trucks make the replace done by 2012 As

foundation repaired the cargo owner must to pay an addition tax about 20ft 35$

40ft 79$

14

In the maritime department the speed reduction incentive took action in

Jan2005 When ship entry into the port boundary speed must be reduced under

20 miles 12kont At the beginning the effect of this plan is very clearly so the

limitation may be raised to 40mile And AMP (Alternative Maritime Power ) is

encouraged to be built and developed as to ship use their engine and get GHG

emission

② New York- New Jersey Port

The New York- New Jersey Port Authority brought out environment policy on

CO2 emission reduction The main concepts as following first reduce PX SOX

3 each year and CO2 5 Second ship must utilize sulfur-low fuel as a

obligation Third AMP is provided Forth modern the unloading and loading

equipment must be built Fifth promote trucks replacement Sixth reform the ship

engine Seventh invent 9 billion dollars in the following 10 years Eighth invent

to all hybrid equipment (325) Ninth install the hybrid truck in AMPT and

NYCT

③ Seattle Port

15

In Seattle Port Air Environment Maritime Improvement plan has been

accepted in 2005 The plan includes first set up Puget Sound Maritime Air

Forum and make one AMP provide services for two tour ships second change

the diesel hybrid equipment into electric utilization Third use bio-diesel and

diesel catalyst and reduce the emission Forth emphasize the standard and plan of

truck minimum the idling time

Seattle Port Tacoma Port and Vancouver made a assignment and promote

ldquoNorthwest Ports Clean Air Strategyrdquo

④ Auckland Port

Auckland Port set up the aging replacement plan in 2008 and invent 20 milion

dollars gas emission should reach the level And cargo transport system in port

hinterland port authority and Air environment management committee make

cooperation and give an incentive to truck which use new clean technology

Table232 Short term and Long term Green Port Plans in Auckland Port

16

17

232 EU

Rotterdam Port

As the biggest Port in EU Rotterdam Port takes more affords in reducing the

CO2 emission Main programs are low carbon footprint AMP and so on The

limitation of CO2 emission reduces down 50 of 1990 by 2025

In July 2008 the authority of Rotterdam port gave international cooperation

with other ports an extra boost by organizing the World Ports Climate Conference

During this conference the authority of Rotterdam discussed possible ways in

which ports and business could reduce air pollution and CO2 emissions The

proposals the authority of Rotterdam was set out in a declaration which was

supported by all 55 port cities attending the conference The conference resulted

in five projects to improve air quality and reduce CO2 emissions The authority of

Rotterdam is behind the project to further elaborate an Environmental Ship Index

The Rotterdam Climate Initiative is a joint venture with the municipality of

Rotterdam DCMR Environmental Protection Agency Rijnmond and Deltalinqs

Common goal is to halve CO2 emissions in the region by 2025 in comparison with

1990 levels In connection with the Rotterdam Climate Initiative the port works

on (together with DCMR and others) creating an infrastructure for the capture

18

transport and storage of CO2 A business case presented in the summer of 2008 is

now being elaborated into a business plan The business case concludes that

Rotterdam can begin in 2015 with the capture transport and underground storage

of five million tons of CO2 per annum This means that the basic infrastructure

will then be in place for further growth in capture and storage to twenty million

tons in 2025

In 2008 a start was made on the development of a sustainability index for

activities relating to the P for Planet (environment) In 2009 it will further expand

the index to cover the P for People and the P for Profit In the first phase of the

sustainability index CO2 footprint sustainable purchasing sustainable building

and sustainable land allocation will be covered

233 Japan

① Tacoma Port

In the Tacoma Port there are some programs on protecting the air water and

soil environment

In the air protection department ldquoNorthwest Ports Clean Air Strategyrdquo

ldquoGreen Gateway for Traderdquo and ldquoTruck Programrdquo had brought out to against air

pollution The concepts include using ultra-low sulfur diesel bio-diesel and other

cleaner-burning fuels in cargo-handling equipment using low-sulfur distillate

19

fuels at berth adding ldquogreen designrdquo environmental features to ships including

diesel-electric motors that save up to 30 percent in fuel and significantly reduce

emissions setting targets to change older less-efficient truck engines installing

anti-idling devices on rail-switching engines as well as partnering on other

innovative technological advance

The Port of Tacomarsquos four dockside rail yards move cargo quickly and

efficiently from container terminals They also reduce the number of trucks on

city streets and highways Each full train that leaves the Port represents 250 to 300

trucks not on our roads reducing roadway congestion and diesel emissions The

lowest emission route to ship cargo from Asia to the US Midwest is through the

Puget Sound according to the results of a study by Herbert Engineering released

in May 2009

And in the land protection program there are successful clean projects open

spaces and future habitat restoration In 2007 the Port purchased about 70 acres

of open space known as Juliarsquos Gulch and Storey Pit located between the

Tideflats and residential Northeast Tacoma Monitor water quality system is in

utilization in the water department in Tacoma Port

② Tokyo Port

In the Tokyo Port Green Port programs are almost similar with Tacoma Port

e-RTGC (Rubber Tired Gantry Crane) the barge between Tokyo and Yocohama

20

which shorten international maritime container cargo transportation land distance

super eco-shipbuilding technology dissemination and promotion green business

certification operation and shippers and logistics companies support cooperation

③ Osaka Port and Hakata Port

AMP electrical power equipment and solar power equipment are in utilization in

Osaka Port E-RTGC and solar power of refrigerated container are in utilization in

the Hakata Port

234 Korea

In Busan Port a set of Green Port took implementation such as LNG truck

E-RTGC equipment utilization eco-friendly transport means conversion (rail

canal barge) and GHG emission reduction obligation Table233

21

ltTable 233gt Summary of the Main Port of Green Port Measures

COUNTRY PORT MEASURES

US

LALB Port

Green flag AMP discharge gas reduction obligation

recommends use of alternative fuels and clean fuel

funding for the development of alternative fuels facilities

by new engine development instead of NOx emissions

green truck program (reduce70-80) low-sulfur fuel

utilization restore and revitalize the Los Cerritos

Wetlands

New York

Port

AMP modernized facilities utilization high speed hybrid

yard

Auckland

Port

Incentives on the new cleaning technology containers

transportation system

Seattle Port

AMP green ship membership Tier 4 level reducing PM

by 1994 level Smart Way program Northwest Ports

Clean Air Strategy

EU Rotterdam

Port

Clean engine (barge) green ship membership carbon

footprint calculation cruise ship which under port

authority change to use low-sulfur fuel low emission

engine development and utilization Green Award AMP

ship recycling incentives

Japan

Tokyo Port

RTGC (Rubber Tired Gantry Crane) apply for the barge

between Tokyo and Yocohama shorten international

maritime container cargo transportation land distance

super eco-shipbuilding technology dissemination and

promotion green business certification operation

shippers and logistics companies support cooperation

Osaka Port AMP electrical power equipment solar power equipment

Hakata Port E-RTGC solar power utilization in refrigerated container

Korea Busan Port

LNG truck E-RTGC eco-friendly transport means

conversion (rail canal barge) GHG emission reduction

obligation

22

24 Green Port Indicators Research

As the previous section list shown Green Port measures and programs are

substantially the same

When a ship entry in the port boundary from voyage many ports give a

incentive on shifting and utilizing sulfur-low fuel and reducing the speed under

20 miles when the ship berth in the port the alternative maritime power are

provided which replace its power generation

Next in the cargo unloading and loading department the same with above

utilization of sulfur-low fuel and electrical equipment are promoted and

eco-driving education to driver is necessary what speed is fuel fully burning and

emission minimum point

In the cargo transport department in other words truck department the

replacement on aging trucks is popular in many ports aging trucks are prohibited

close to port at the same time an incentive or support function are provided on

aging replacement The automated equipments are recommended to utilize in the

Green Port like hybrid yard tractor And a perfect plan on truck running also could

reduce the idling time and against the emission of CO2

The details reference the following Table 241

23

Table241 Green Port measures in port each department

Emission reduction programs

Ship

department

Shipping

in the

port

boundary

Obligation on the utilization of sulfur-low fuel

Reform ship engine and utilize hybrid

Speed reduce in the port entrance(a off-shore fee

incentive)

Off-shore AMP

Shift utilization system of clean fuel

Unloading and loading

department

Obligation on the utilization of sulfur-low fuel

Replace electrical equipment

Eco-driving

Truck department Hybrid yard tractor utilization

Promote aging truck replacement

Minimum the idling time

Others LED light in the Port

Develop renew and recycle resource energy

The Green Port measures in this study are e-RTGC AMP AGV Green Ship

certification system incentives on the new clean technology Green Flag(speed

reduction incentive)eco-friendly transport means conversion joint distribution

the cost on account of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction polities and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

The details and definition on each Green Port measure and the relationship with

Port Competitiveness will be expressed in next chapter

24

Chapter 3 The Relationship between Port

Competitiveness and Green Port Construction

31 Port Competitiveness Literature Review

Although past studies on port selection models have focused on port selection

made by port facilities port services port rates and charge and location

Murphy made a survey between 534 shipping companies and port authorities in

1989 and between 1850 shipping companies and port authorities in 1992

Comparing with other papers Murphys got a survey among more widely

objects In his paper port selection(port competitiveness) was seen to affected by

facilities situation appropriate pilotage max ship entrance probability the

25

capability of handling non-regular cargos whether to provide information of ship

nationality or not and port services level

In French model (1979) there are two factors affecting the port selection (port

competitiveness) endogenous factor and exogenous factor In endogenous factors

there are adequacy and physical plant condition of terminal facilities terminal rate

and charges frequency and geographic coverage of ship and freight services the

capacity of connecting to inland rails or transport net and the services provides for

the shipping or logistics And exogenous factors included the size and economic

capacity of hinterland as a source exports or market for imports national

economic situation trade policy and support established by government the

situation at home and abroad

The same as Frenchs paper in Paters paper in 1990 there are endogenous and

exogenous factors too In endogenous there are the services provides for the

shipping or logistics capacity of terminal facilities situation and condition of

facilities operation strategies established by port authority convenience to utilize

And the political situation at home and abroad social change economic factor

stabilized labor and capital However in 2004 there is a tremendous change in

Peters new paper There are four parts multi-modal process interface transport

modes infrastructure Multi-model Process part includes ship entrance rapid

speed and accuracy shipper and shipping companies reactive operation flexibility

Interface includes labor power information technology and so on And there are

26

ship calls frequency and amount of fleet factors in the transport modes part In the

infrastructure part includes port facility equipments and so on

Port facilities rates and charges services inland situation and social

circumstance factors affect the port selection and competitiveness a lot from the

research until 1992 by Murphy And in Lirn and Pater research 2003-2004 the

new and detail factors are shown to us

We can clearly see the contents in next table

27

Table 311 Prevention literature research results

Influence factors

French

(1979)

Endogenous

port facilities port rate and charges calls frequency port services

port connection with inland

Exogenous

economic size of hinterland national economic situation trade

policy home and abroad situation

Willingale

(1982)

voyage distance economy size entrance to port and route port

facilities max ship entrance probability port operation rates and

charges port authority scale of port

Slack

(1985)

cost of inland transportation port proximity ship demurrage

multi-transport

Peter

(1990)

Endogenous

port facilities condition of facilities operation strategies

convenience to utilize

Exogenous

political situation social change economic factor stabilized labor

and capital

UNCTAD

(1992)

port facilities services location level of financial industry

information communication system social circumstances economic

stability

Murphy

(1992)

facilities situation appropriate pilotage max ship entrance

probability the capability of handling non-regular cargos whether to

provide information of ship nationality or not port services level

Lirn

(2003-2004)

physical and technologic facilities geopolitical location port

operation and management shipping and terminal cost

Peter

(2004)

Multi-modal Process

ship entrance rapid speed and accuracy shipper and shipping

companies reactive operation flexibility

Interface labor and capital

Transport modes ship calls frequency and amount of fleet factors

28

And there are many experts and scholars research for the influence factors to

port selection and competitiveness in Korea The specific content follows table5

Table 312 Literature research in Korean academia

Influence factors

Jeon Il-su (1992) location facilities charges service level (EDI) terminal operation

port authority

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

( 1993 )

location facilities throughput charges service operation

situation

Kim Hak-so

(1993)

export shipping amount of annual cost of each ton of cargo

marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km of

cargo loading time

import marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km

of cargo amount of liner ship

Yeo Gi-tae (1996) location facilities throughput charge service operation situation

Ha Dong-u amp

Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

location facilities service level logistics charges environment of

logistics service

Yeo Gi-tae (1999) location facilities throughput charges service

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

throughput quay length yard area GNP

Kum Jong-su

(2001)

distance between port and cargo site terminal facilities service

the capacity of multi-transport capacity of cargo handling

administrative service rates and charges of inland transport

congestion

Yeo Gi-tae (2002) location throughput facilities service level

Kim Jin-gu (2002) port facilities location cargo amount rates and charges services

29

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005)

voyage degree to attract cargo cargo handling cost amount of

handling cargo connection to inland service reliability location

berth availability quay length feeder network depth

transshipment volumes cargo security profitability

offing degree to attract cargo berth availability cargo handling

cost transshipment volumes

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005)

cargo handling amount port facilities location rates and charges

level of service

Heo Yun-su

(2005)

port facilities rates and charges services marketing geopolitics

location economic and social circumstance

Kim Geun-seop

(2007)

port services facilities cargo handling amount location cost

productivity factor global factor

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) rates and charges services port characteristics

Many experts and scholars make a research on port selection and

competitiveness recently But the factors selection criteria are difference

Nevertheless the main factors are facilities services cost and so on

Therefore port competitiveness factors which chose in this study are port

facilities port services port rates and charges and social circumstance

However the main factors are not the whole factors any more more and more

detail factors and characteristic factors appearance Port selection and

competitiveness factors have changed And the development content is introduced

in next part

30

32 Port Competitiveness Development Tree

As mentioned above port facilities port rates and charges and port location are

the basic factors in the port selection and competitiveness

From the following table we can discover that first one facilities rates and

charges and location are the most important factor in port selection and

competitiveness second one the importance of social circumstance turns larger

inland connection is necessary all the time

Table 321 Main factor in the Pretentious Research

31

port facilities rates and

charges

inland

connection

social

circumstance location

French (1979) radic radic radic

Wiliingale (1982) radic radic

Slack (1985) radic

Pater (1990) radic radic

UNCTAD (1992) radic radic radic

Murphy(1992) radic

Jeon Il-su (1992) radic radic radic

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

(1993)

radic radic radic

Kim Hak-so

(1993) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1996) radic radic radic

Ha Dong-u

amp Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1998) radic radic radic

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

radic

Kum Jong-su

(2001) radic radic radic radic

Kim Jin-gu(2002) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(2002) radic radic

Lirn(2003-2004) radic radic radic

Pater(2004) radic

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005) radic radic radic

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005) radic radic radic

Heo Yun-su

(2005) radic radic radic radic

Kim Geun-seop

(2007) radic radic radic radic

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) radic

32

33 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green

Port Construction

Following the research above Port facilities rates and charges inland

connection and social circumstance are chose in this study port selection and

competitiveness department

e-RTGC Electric rubber tired gantry crane is a mobile gantry crane used for

stacking intermodal containers within the stacking areas of a container terminal

e-RTGC are used at container terminals and container storage yards to straddling

multiple lanes of railroad and container storage or when maximum storage

density in the container stack is desired

AMP is shorted for Alternative Marine Power and Itrsquos a facility which

provides the electric system in the land for ship which entry in the port The

facility can reduce emissions which ship get entrance in the port

AGV is a mobile robot that follows markers or wires in the floor or uses

vision or lasers They are most often used in industrial applications to move

materials around a manufacturing facility or a warehouse Automatic Guided

Vehicle systems work around-the-clock making continuous flow and just-in-time

delivery easier to achieve Application of the automatic guided vehicle has broade

33

ned during the late 20th century and they are no longer restricted to industrial

environments

The e-RTGC AMP and AGV are the new clean facilities and equipments in the

Green Port they donrsquot reduce the efficiency of handling cargo and they also

reduce the CO2 emission account

Green ship certification system if a ship utilizes clean and CO2 emission

reduction technology on the ship building adds equipment and management and

son on certification would be received And the port authority gives some

incentive and preferential treatment among 45 ports Such as a better schedule is

provided for green membership ship priority in handing cargo and discount on

entrance fee

Incentives on the new cleaning technology There are two expressions about

this measure one is that the port authority give a incentive to ship which have a

great utilization on the new cleaning technology and the other one is that

environment provide many incentives to the authority which utilize the new

cleaning technology in the port such as LED street lamp solar power cranes

Green flag The Green Flag incentive program was set up to encourage ships to

slow down in order to improve air quality The Green Flag program provides

approximately $2 million a year in discounts for vessel operators who slow their

ships to 12 knots (22kmh) or less within 20miles (32km) of the harbor

34

According to the Port the Green Flag program reduced air pollution by 600tons in

2007 and is expected to do better in 2008

All of Green ship certification system incentives on the new cleaning

technology and Green Flag are incentives provided for users of port and aimed at

reduce port rates and charges So the 3 measures belong to affect port rates and

charges

Eco-friendly transport means conversion Eco-friendly means of transport are

much accounted of green port for example railway discharge less GHG emission

than truck barge with a clean engine among the river and inshore canal

Joint distribution joint distribution is a collaborative system which port

provides among many logistics companies It can make the cargo handling speed

rapidly and reduce cargo storage time for CO2 emission reducing such as

refrigerated container In an addition it also makes the logistics companies

transport more efficient

Cost on amount of CO2 emission differenced from other port the cost on

amount of CO2 is included in the port cost The cost aims to reduce the CO2

emission directly

CO2 emission reduction policies compared with other traditional port Green

Port gives more cost discount and incentives but in an addition there are many

policies on CO2 emission restriction Such as aging trucks restrictions in inland

transport department ship entry speed reduced and fuel changed in the ship

35

department and so on Whether these restriction policies constrain port

development or not and the degree of these policies constrain port development

will be explain by the AHP results

Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors some ports in the

western countries are opened as a travel place for visitors so as to change the

polluted impress and raise the position in our heart

Cost on amount of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction policies and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors can affect the social

circumstance factor Whether these measures can or not improve the social

circumstance and port competitiveness we have to see the next calculation and

results

36

Chapter 4 The Green Port Competitiveness

Analysis

41 The Green Port Competitiveness Model by AHP

The AHP is one multi-criteria decision making method which has been

extensively applied to a variety of decision-making situations The multi-criteria

techniques are considered to be a promising framework for evaluation of

decision-making factors since they have the potential to take into account

conflicting multidimensional incommensurable and uncertain effects of

decisions explicitly

In order to apply the AHP method a hierarchical decision schema was

constructed by decomposing the decision problem into its decision elements

37

After that the importance or preferences of the decision elements are examined in

a pair-wise comparison to the elements in the hierarchy The parameters are

estimated using pair-wise comparisons between the importance of the attribute or

decision element in the function using data made by each responder Making

comparisons is a question of which of the two attributes is more import as well as

how much more important

Follow these theories the Green Port Competitiveness Model choose factors as

follow in port competitiveness factors part there are port facilities port rates and

charges inland connection social circumstance in Green Port construction part

there are e-RTGC AMP AGV green ship certification system green flag

incentives on the new cleaning technology eco-friendly transport means

conversion joint distribution CO2 emission reduction policies cost on amount of

CO2 emission beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

38

Figure 41 Green Port Competitiveness AHP model

Follow the Green Port Competitiveness AHP as shown we set a questionnaire

survey to many experts scholars working in logistics system area And we got 15

ones and 14 ones results are believable and integrated

42 Green Port Competitiveness Analysis

39

The key to construction of the factors which affects the port competitiveness

is to determine the conceptual model The selection of the factors directly affects

the evaluation of the result In order to ensure the accuracy objectivity and

practicality of evaluation results the following basic principles must be followed

when selecting factors systematic principles the principle of universal

comparability practical principle and goal-oriented principle In view of the

foregoing the competitiveness which affected by Green Port construction model

is made The analysis follows established principles of port competitiveness

evaluation taking into account the characteristics and functions of the port as well

as port facilities port services port rates and charges ship entrance inland

connection social circumstances and so on

(1) Port facilities

e-RTGC U11 AMP U12 AGV U13

(2) Port rates and charges

Green ship certification system U21 Incentives on the new clean

technology U22 Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

(3) Inland connection

Eco-friendly means of transport U31 Joint distribution U32

(4) Social circumstances

40

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41 CO2 emission reduction policies

U42 Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors U43

Table 421 Details of Level I and Level II values

Level I

indicators Symbol Level II indicators Symbol

Port facilities A1

e-RTGC U11

AMP U12

AGV U13

Port rates and

charges A2

Green ship certification system U21

Incentives on the new clean technology U22

Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

Inland

connection A3

Eco-friendly means of transport U31

Joint distribution U32

Social

circumstances A4

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41

CO2 emissions reduction policies U42

Beautiful environment construction in inner

harbors U43

41

I Determination of level I indicator weights

As the ports competitiveness evaluation indicators at this level are complex

and the elements are not easily quantified AHP is adopted to determine the

indicator weights with the basic steps as follows

(1) Establish a comparative judgment matrix The comparative judgment

matrix is obtained through comparing contributed proportion of multiple

indicators to the overall target by the judgment scale wherein the fuzzy

judgment number introduced is 1 3 5 7 and 9 and the reciprocal of

such number indicates the important degree of one element relatively to

another The results are shown in next table

Table 422 Comparison matrix of level I indicators

A1 A2 A3 A4

A1 1 15 13 3

A2 5 1 3 7

A3 3 13 1 5

A4 13 17 15 1

(2) Calculate the characteristic vector of the comparative judgment matrix

which refers to the weighted vector of the indicator The writer adopts

42

the geometric method to calculate the characteristic vector The

calculated result is as follows

ω=(012 0560 026 006)T λmax=418 It can be obtained from the table

RI=09 Wherein ω is the characteristic vector corresponding to the

maximum characteristic value λmax of the comparative judgment matrix

namely the weighted vector of the indicator RI is the average

consistency indicator as shown in following table

Table423 Average random consistency indicator RI

Matrix Order

RI

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

0 0 058 09 112 124 132 141

Matrix Order

RI

9 10 11 12 13 14 15

145 149 152 154 156 158 159

(3) Conduct consistency check on the comparative judgment matrix Adopt

the random consistency proportion CR to judge the consistency of the

comparative judgment matrix According to CI= (λmax -n)(n-1) and

CR=CIRI it can be obtained through calculation CR=007lt01 Thus

this comparative judgment matrix has a satisfactory consistency and the

indicator weight coefficient calculated through this matrix is acceptable

43

II Determination of level II indicator weights

The data at this level are the details of level Ⅰ indicator The judgment

matrix obtained through comparing multiple sub-indicators under Level Ⅰ

indicators is adopted to determine the weights of sub-indicators under each

indicator one by one The specific steps are as follows

(1) The experts score the weights within the given range To determine the

weights of several small indicators under the same big indicator it is

supposed that the score of small indicator ｋ under the indicator j made

by the expert i is Xijk wherein i=12n n is the total number of

experts ј=12m m is the total number of LevelⅡ indicator к

=12Oj Oj is the number of small indicators under the big indicator ј

іјк IJK LRC l I j k

(2) The credit rating of the expert і is l l =1 2 3 l =1 indicates this expert

is quite familiar with the evaluated contents l =2 indicator this expert is

44

with the evaluated contents l =3 indicates this expert is not quite familiar

with the evaluated contents yi1 is the=08 yi2 =05 and yi3=1

(3) The comprehensive evaluation score of small indicator l under the

indicator j is as follows

(4) The formula for normalization processing of indicator weights is as

follows and the absolute weight of the indicator set is marked as

q=(q1q2q11)

(5) Because of the same justification and principle we donrsquot give the detail

about the calculation The same with the level Ⅰ calculation we

manipulation data one by one and get 14 results And obtain the average

45

results by weighted average method The results detail as Table for the

final weights of Level-Ⅱ evaluation indicators

Above the calculation process and method are just one of data from the

questionable surveys In this study the final results are got from the

weighted average by the results of each questionable survey

The final results are shown as Table424

Table424 Indicator weights table of indicator system

Level I

indicators Weight LevelⅡ indicators

Relative

weight

Absolute

weight

Importance

percentage

Port Facilities

A1 02735

e-RTGC U11 05506 01506 1506

AMP U12 01648 00451 451

AGV U13 02826 00773 773

Port Rates and

Charges A2

02902

Green ship certification s

ystem U21 04724 01371 1371

Incentives on the new

clean technology U22 02871 00833 833

Green Flag (speed

reduction incentive)U23 02405 00698 698

Inland

connection A3

02865

Eco-friendly means of

transport U31 05942 01702 1702

Joint distribution U32 04058 01163 1163

Social

environmentA4 00863

Cost on amount of CO2

emission U41 03698 00319 319

CO2 emissions reduction

policies U42 02273 00196 196

Beautiful environment

construction in inner

harbors U43

04029 00348 348

46

III Case study

In the questionable survey we also got the mark of Green Port measures

evaluation value of many main ports such as Singapore Port Shanghai Port

Hongkong Port Busan Port LALB Port Rotterdam Port and Yocohama Port

The highest mark is 5 and lowest one is 1

Table425 Evaluation value of many main ports

Singapore

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

LALB

Port

Rotterdam

Port

Yocohama

Port

Port facilities 38000 36000 34000 38182 38000 42000 32000

Port rates and

charges 32000 36000 31000 35455 32000 39000 33000

Inland

connection 39000 34545 35000 29091 35000 45000 36000

Social

circumstance 42000 32727 41000 32000 38000 42727 36000

With the Green Port and Port competitiveness indicator weights results these

ports got the final evaluation value

47

Table426 Final evaluation value on main ports Green Port measures and

competitiveness

Rotterdam

Port

Singapore

Port

LALB

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

Yocohama

Port

394 345 330 330 319 318 317

43 Results Analysis

From the results table we can obtain the many results as following

① The main Green Port measures which are more important to improve port

competitiveness are Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system the indicator weights are 01702 01506 and

01371 among the 11 indicators

② In the Green Port construction Cost on amount of CO2 emission and CO2

emissions reduction policies are the restrictions indicators but the weight

of two indicators are not big 00319 and 00196 So effect on Green Port

construction to port competitiveness does have the weaken capacity but

not clearly strengthen more clearly Thus Green Port construction really

could improve the port competitiveness

48

③ In the case study traditional ports Rotterdam and Singapore Port give us

better examples on Green Port construction especially Rotterdam Port

④ Hongkong Busan and Yocohama Port all got a lower evaluation value

But in detail Hongkong and Yocohama Port got a lower on the port

facilities and rates and charges Busan Port got a higher on the port

facilities and rates and charges but a lower on the inland connection and

social circumstance

⑤ Shanghai Port doesnrsquot have Particular strength factors but the

comprehensive strength is not bad the same as LALB Port

49

Chapter 5 Conclusion

In this thesis the effects of Green Port construction for improving the port

competitiveness have been studied Under the definition of Green Port the

characteristics of Green Port and its effects has been shown by analysing the AHP

method which based on the questionary survey for Green Port specialists and port

officers

Follow the results of analysis on Green Port competitiveness AHP model

Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green ship certification system is

better for Green Port Construction welcome for shipping companies and citizens

who live around the port And in the analysis of Port competitiveness factors port

rates and charges always affects port competitiveness a lot As a trend inland

connection factor abstracts more attention of shipping companies

50

On the trend of port department each port should take a activity to adjust

strategy for improving its competitiveness Such as in the main ports evaluation

Busan port get a high value on port rates and charges and port facilities but as a

lower value on inland connection factor the final value is not as well as we look

forward In the evaluation of Singapore Port through it gets a lower value on rates

and charges higher value on inland connection and social circumstance causes the

final value are better So the Green Port Construction may be a trend in port

department

In the results of this thesis Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system are better solutions for Green Port Construction And

especially it can be verified that the port rates and charges always affects port

competitiveness Futhermore the investment for Green Port construction and its

effects have to be verified in the future

51

References

1 Hoyle B S and Smith J 1992 Transport and Development In Modern

transport geography edited by B S Hoyle R D Knowles (London Belhaven

Press)pp11-31

2 Beresford A K C De Souza A J R G and Pettit S J 2005 Stategic

development of liner shipping companies and terminal operators Ocean yearbook

19(Chicago 1L The University of Chicago Press) pp 732-750

3 Heaver T D 2002 Supply chain and logistics management implications for

liner shipping In The handbook of maritime economics and business edited by C

Grammenos (LondonLLP) pp 375-396

4 Park T E (2011) A Study on selection criteria of Green Port and evaluation of

major Korean port A masters thesis of graduate school of Incheon university

52

5 JeongBH (2009)Green port management policy directions in the green

growth era- The case of Gwangyang port in Republic of Korea Journal of Korea

Port Economic Association Vol25(3) p361-384

6 Lee J S Han N H(2009) A study on Green Port Revitalization According to

Air Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

7 Lee Y K Nan J W(2010)Green Logistics Policy Analysis and Implications

of Japan

8 Lee B S (2010)Tendency and Countermeasures on Green Logistics in Port

Logistics Company A masters thesis of graduate school of Korean Maritime

university

9 Lee J S (2009) A Study on Green Port Revitalization According to Air

Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

10 Zhang F Y Li Z Lu X J Yao X L(2008)Competitiveness of Inland

Ports Based on F-AHP

11 Port of Long Beach (2009) Green Port Policy wwwpolbcom

12 The port of Los Angeles wwwportoflosangelesorg

VI

Second the measure factors for Green Port construction is suggested by through

the previous literature reviews and an evaluation model is designed

To evaluate the Green Port construction the questionary survey for Green Port

specialists and port officers is achieved And the effect factors for Green Port

construction are obtained by using AHP(Analytic Hierarchy Process) method

Last the relationship between Green Port construction and port competitiveness is

verified by analyzing the effect factors Thus the port competitiveness would be

improved by construction of Green Port

VII

항만경쟁력 강화를 위한 그린포트 구축효과 분석

Wang Liru

물류시스템공학과

한국해양대학교 대학원

국문초록

2009 년 세계 경제 위기 이후 회복세로 바뀜에 의해 항만산업의 물동량이

증가하고 선박의 대형화 및 신속화가 점차 가속화됨에 따라 항만 시장도

경쟁이 치열할 것으로 전망되어진다

한편 교토의정서가 공식 발효됨에 따라 각국에서는 대기오염에 대한 관심이

증가되고 있으며 CO2 배출량에 대한 감축 목표를 설정할 정도로 대기오염을

방지하는 자구책을 강구하고 있다 이에 따라 항만에서도 그린포트로의

전환이 불가피한 실정이다

따라서 본 연구에서는 그린포트구축 활동을 항만의 경쟁력관점에서

고찰하여 각 특징을 분석한다 또한 전문가의 설문조사를 행하고 이에 대한

VIII

AHP 분석을 통하여 그린포트 구축 활동간의 우선순위를 도출하며 구축결과가

항만의 경쟁력에 어떠한 영향을 미칠 것인지를 고찰한다

IX

List of Figures

Figure 11 Research Process 4

Figure 21 Green Port appearance and basic definition 10

Figure 41 Green Port Competitiveness AHP model 38

X

List of Tables

Table 211 Objective of CO2 reduces in main countries 8

Table 221 4kinds Green Port construction promote directions 11

Table 231 Details of LALB Port Green Port Promotion Programs 13

Table 232 Short term and Long term Green Port Plans in Auckland Port 16

Table 233 Summary of the Main Port of Green Port Measures 21

Table 241 Green Port measures in port each department 23

Table 311 Prevention literature research results 27

Table 312 Literature research in Korean academia 28

Table 321 Main factor in the Pretentious Research 31

Table 421 Details of Level I and Level II values 40

Table 422 Comparison matrix of level I indicators 41

Table 423 Average random consistency indicator RI 42

Table 424 Indicator weights table of indicator system 45

Table 425 Evaluation value of many main ports 46

Table 426 Final evaluation value on main ports Green Port measures and

competitiveness 47

XI

CONTENT

Abstract V

List of Figures IX

List of Tables X

Chapter 1 Introduction 1

11 Research background and objective 1

12 Scope and structure of research 3

Chapter 2 Green Port Construction Situation 6

21 Green Port Construction Background 6

22 The Definition of Green Port 9

23 Green Port Construction Situation in major countries 12

24 Green Port Indicators Research 22

Chapter 3 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green Port

Construction 24

31 Port Competitiveness Literature Review 24

32 Port Competitiveness Development Tree 30

33 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green Port

Construction 32

Chapter 4 The Green Port Competitiveness Analysis 36

41 The Green Port Competitiveness Model by AHP 36

42 Green Port Competitiveness Analysis 38

XII

43 Results Analysis 47

Chapter 5 Conclusion 49

References 51

1

Chapter 1 Introduction

11 Research background and objective

The Kyoto Protocol is an international agreement linked to the United Nations

Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) The major feature of the

Kyoto Protocol is that it sets binding targets for 37 industrialized countries and the

European community for reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to fight

global warming These amounts will be lower an average of five per cent based on

1990 levels over the five-year period 2008-2012 The protocol was initially

adopted on 11 December 1997 in Japan but entered into force on 16 February

2005 As of July 2010 191 countries and states have signed and ratified the

protocol

2

After ltKyoto Protocolgt has brought out in 1997 more and more people put

their attention on environment pollution Rapid development in industry

department brings out air water soil noise and wildlife pollution and destruction

As the health development of economic alleviating environmental pollution and

restoring original ecology extremely necessary

Focus on the long-term and future development in the port many counties

government and ports authorities pay attentions on Green Port construction

In the short term C40 World Ports Climate Conference draws up some

adaptive plans among big cities and major ports The plans include the incentives

provided to green ship user cooperation among the C40 member ports

encouragement to develop and utilize the Alternative Maritime Power and so on

In EU Green Port major policies is prohibition the ship utilization on fuel

which sulfur content over 2 (after Jun2010 the limitation of sulfur content is

1) There are also Marco Polo I and Marco Polo II plans in EU In Marco Polo I

Modal Shift Action Catalyst Action and Common Learning Action are included

from 2003 to 2006 And after 2007 in Marco II Motorways of the Sea Action

Traffic Avoidance Actions and Rail Synergy are added

In US people pay more attention to developing the new technology for

reducing CO2 emission Such as power generator and renewable resources and

Northwest Ports Clean Air Strategy

3

Compared with other departments green policy in port department is explained

as green maritime and green shipping For example super-eco ship building and

Modal Shift promotion

The same aim to Hong Kong Ports AMP E-RTG hybrid truck bio-diesel

recycling energy CNG LNG and development are in utilization

ldquoGreen Growth Policyrdquo is the measure which brought out by the Korean

government Follow this strategy Korean port authority also takes out the ldquoGreen

Port building comprehensive planrdquo Furthermore low carbon self-sufficiency port

the disaster safety port eco-friendly port and resource recycling port are the

understandings on the Korean ldquoGreen Growth Policyrdquo

As the port support policies being changed port competitiveness factors are

changed Especially the importance degree of each factor has been changed a

lot The purpose of this study is explaining the competitiveness effects changed

which taking Green Port measures and programs port and give a better advice and

suggestion to Green Port construction

12 Scope and structure of research

The method to analysis the effects of Green Port construction for improving

port competitiveness is AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process)

4

And research process in this study is shown in ltFigure 1gt

ltFigure 1gt Research process

In chapter 1 research background and objective research method and process

are included And chapter 2 introduces the Green Port construction background

definition the Green Port construction situation in many countries and each

department introduction in Green Port construction The chapter 3 views the

literature on port competitiveness and obtains the influence factors used in this

study trend and relationship between port competitiveness The chapter 4 based

5

on the survey data and calculates each indicator importance degree by AHP

method and analysis the result Finally in chapter 5 the conclusion summary the

whole study by the result analysis

6

Chapter 2 Green Port Construction Situation

21 Green Port Construction Background

As the United Nations Secretary General has said the greatest challenge which

we are facing is environmental regulators It is a growing crisis with economic

health and safety food production security and other dimensions

The Kyoto Protocol is an international agreement linked to the United Nations

Framework Convention on Climate Change The major feature of the Kyoto

Protocol is that it sets binding targets for 37 industrialized countries and the

European community for reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to fight

global warming These amount to an average of five percent bellow 1990 level

over the five-year period 2008-2012

The protocol was initially adopted on 11 December 1997 in Japan but all of the

member countries entered into force on16 February 2005 The Kyoto Protocol

7

was adopted in Kyoto Japan on 11 December 1997 and entered into force on 16

February 2005 The detailed rules for the implementation of the Protocol were

adopted at COP 7 in Marrakesh in 2001 and are called the ldquoMarrakesh Accordsrdquo

Follow the ltKyoto Protocolgt several flexible mechanisms are allowed Such

as emissions trading the clean development mechanism (CDM) and joint

implementation The mechanisms allow AnnexⅠcounties to meet their GHG

emission limitations by purchasing GHG emission reductions credits from

elsewhere through financial exchanges projects that reduce emissions in

non-Annex Ⅰ countries or Annex Ⅰ countries with excess allowances The

mechanisms help stimulate green investment and help Parties meet their emission

targets in a cost-effective way

Therefore many countries take action on reducing the GHG discharge emission

For example increase the energy utilization efficiency develop the solar power

wind energy tidal energy and other clean energy in their industry The details

about objective of GHG emission reduction in main countries are displayed as the

following ltTable 1gt

8

ltTable 1gt Objective of CO2 reduce in main countries

Bench

mark of

Year

Objective

()

Absolute

quantity

()

Remark

EU 1990 20~30 -20~-30 Norway New Zealand 40 reducing

USA 2005 17 -3 Passed by House of Representatives

Japan 1990 25 -25 On the premise of attention with China

India

Korea 2020

(BAU) 30 mdashmdash

Discharge amount is up to 564million don

in estimation

China 2005 40~50 60~150

(2005) Each GDP

India 2005 20-25 mdashmdash With the developed countries

participation

Russia 1990 25 -25 Be neutral country

Norway 1990 30~40 -30~-40 mdashmdash

New

Zealand 1990 10~20 -10~ -20 mdashmdash

Austria 2000 5~25 -3~-11 mdashmdash

Canada 2003 20 -3 mdashmdash

Mexico 2002 50 mdashmdash With the developed countries

participation

South

Africa

2020

(BAU) 34 mdashmdash

With the developed countries

participation

Brazil 2020

(BAU) 36~39

-20

(2005) mdashmdash

(Korean Maritime Institute 20095)

9

22 The Definition of Green Port

As the global warming affecting in the world climate has been heavily changed

natural disaster frequently occurred natural resources depletion and supply

imbalance cause crisis to reach a high level For the purpose of getting away from

financial crisis and creating the new growth motivity the counties in the world

make more efforts on developing economic

Because of the realization of this global climate and environment crisis Korean

government had brought out the ldquoGreen Growth Policyrdquo And it made the ldquoGreen

Growth Policyrdquo be embodied and law-governed announced ldquoLow Carbon Green

Growth of the Basic Lawrdquo

In order to coordinate with this policy and law build up the ldquoGreen Growthrdquo

everyone make their efforts and reach ldquoGreen Growthrdquo in Korea each department

As a important industry department port authority also take activity to match the

national strategy of ldquoGreen Growthrdquo and draw up the plan on ldquoGreen Portrdquo

construction

However there isnrsquot a clear definition about the Green Port Korean Land

Transport and Maritime Ministry have explained the Green Port as follows Green

house gas Reducing Energy Effciencing Nature-friendly Port The explanation is

very easy to understand but from a professional point of view it not very

10

comprehensive and concrete So we have to understand the concept in the Green

Port Construction measures and programs There are about 4 kind explanation and

promotion programs in the Green Port Respectively the port which based on

green technology and green business creating new growth motive improving

living standards jumping in the ranks of the advanced port

ltFigure 2gt Green Port appearance and basic definition

In the Green Growth National Strategy Policy there are 10 pieces of policy

directions and 50 researches each department should choose the appropriate one

Follow these researches chose by port availability especially Low Carbon

11

Self-sufficiency Port The Disaster Safety Port Eco-friendly Port Resource

Recycling Port and in this study Green Port construction is a plan on

comprehensive and mix of 4kinds of Green Port Construction

Table 221 Four Promotions for Green Port Construction

Promotion Program

(Green Port type) Activities

Low-Carbon

Self-Sufficiency Port

Eco-friendly inland transportation system building

New renewable resources power equipment utilization

AMP LED utilization

The Disaster Safety

Port

Disaster Prevention environment infrastructure building

Disaster prediction and corresponding system utilization

Eco-Friendly Port Beauty the port by green park planting and so on

Provide eco-friendly port building programs

Resource Recycling

Port

Port waste (silt soil) effectively recycling system

Establish resource recycling port paragon

As table1 shown each type of Green Port has a separate emphasis

Eco-friendly inland transportation system which encourages utilizing rail canal

barge clean system reduces the truck application amount AMP means

Alternative Maritime Power supply system replaces with ship power generation

The Green Port construction in most of counties is the low-carbon self-sufficiency

12

port And in their construction maybe add a few other type promote director like

beauty the port by green park planting and so on

However in this study the Green Port concept is a comprehensive plan among

4 types not a specialization system

23 Green Port Construction Situation in major countries

After ltKyoto protocolgt having brought out each department began to take

affords on the reducing the GHG (greenhouse gas) emission In port department

the activities are embodied in the Green Port construction In this study many

major ports in US EU Japan and Korea are chose to explain for research

231 US

① LALB Port

In order to achieve to reduce marine pollutants standby and build clean port

LALB Port standby resource ministry and environment protection ministry

signed a 5year plan on clean standby action cooperation

This promotion business plan set a set of marine pollutants standby emission

limitation on the ship department from the statistics year 2006-2007 to 2010-2011

handling department heavy duty equipment truck department and so on Such as

13

in Green Port Technology construction department measures and programs are

shown in following Table

Table231 the details of LALB Port Green Port Promotion Programs

Promotion Program

Heavy Equipment Truck

Heavy Equipment

Replace and Update Aging Facilities

Substitute Fuels and Clean Fuel Incentives

Budgetary for the Development of Substitute Fuels

Marine Vessels Tugs

Ship Speed Reduction within the Port

Electrical supply of parking in the Berth

Use low-sulfur fuel (supplementary motor)

Handling Equipment

Air Quality Monitoring

Measure ambient air pollution levels in the vicinity of

the Port

Include a number of real-time air quality measurements

On the restrict situation of heavy equipment trucks and others vessels must to

be replaced and rebuilt in order to minimum the emission of NOx And the trucks

which donrsquot reach the regulate standard do not allowed to get in the port These

regulations will help their owner to replace and update trucks and also set up a

replacement plan to 16000 aging trucks make the replace done by 2012 As

foundation repaired the cargo owner must to pay an addition tax about 20ft 35$

40ft 79$

14

In the maritime department the speed reduction incentive took action in

Jan2005 When ship entry into the port boundary speed must be reduced under

20 miles 12kont At the beginning the effect of this plan is very clearly so the

limitation may be raised to 40mile And AMP (Alternative Maritime Power ) is

encouraged to be built and developed as to ship use their engine and get GHG

emission

② New York- New Jersey Port

The New York- New Jersey Port Authority brought out environment policy on

CO2 emission reduction The main concepts as following first reduce PX SOX

3 each year and CO2 5 Second ship must utilize sulfur-low fuel as a

obligation Third AMP is provided Forth modern the unloading and loading

equipment must be built Fifth promote trucks replacement Sixth reform the ship

engine Seventh invent 9 billion dollars in the following 10 years Eighth invent

to all hybrid equipment (325) Ninth install the hybrid truck in AMPT and

NYCT

③ Seattle Port

15

In Seattle Port Air Environment Maritime Improvement plan has been

accepted in 2005 The plan includes first set up Puget Sound Maritime Air

Forum and make one AMP provide services for two tour ships second change

the diesel hybrid equipment into electric utilization Third use bio-diesel and

diesel catalyst and reduce the emission Forth emphasize the standard and plan of

truck minimum the idling time

Seattle Port Tacoma Port and Vancouver made a assignment and promote

ldquoNorthwest Ports Clean Air Strategyrdquo

④ Auckland Port

Auckland Port set up the aging replacement plan in 2008 and invent 20 milion

dollars gas emission should reach the level And cargo transport system in port

hinterland port authority and Air environment management committee make

cooperation and give an incentive to truck which use new clean technology

Table232 Short term and Long term Green Port Plans in Auckland Port

16

17

232 EU

Rotterdam Port

As the biggest Port in EU Rotterdam Port takes more affords in reducing the

CO2 emission Main programs are low carbon footprint AMP and so on The

limitation of CO2 emission reduces down 50 of 1990 by 2025

In July 2008 the authority of Rotterdam port gave international cooperation

with other ports an extra boost by organizing the World Ports Climate Conference

During this conference the authority of Rotterdam discussed possible ways in

which ports and business could reduce air pollution and CO2 emissions The

proposals the authority of Rotterdam was set out in a declaration which was

supported by all 55 port cities attending the conference The conference resulted

in five projects to improve air quality and reduce CO2 emissions The authority of

Rotterdam is behind the project to further elaborate an Environmental Ship Index

The Rotterdam Climate Initiative is a joint venture with the municipality of

Rotterdam DCMR Environmental Protection Agency Rijnmond and Deltalinqs

Common goal is to halve CO2 emissions in the region by 2025 in comparison with

1990 levels In connection with the Rotterdam Climate Initiative the port works

on (together with DCMR and others) creating an infrastructure for the capture

18

transport and storage of CO2 A business case presented in the summer of 2008 is

now being elaborated into a business plan The business case concludes that

Rotterdam can begin in 2015 with the capture transport and underground storage

of five million tons of CO2 per annum This means that the basic infrastructure

will then be in place for further growth in capture and storage to twenty million

tons in 2025

In 2008 a start was made on the development of a sustainability index for

activities relating to the P for Planet (environment) In 2009 it will further expand

the index to cover the P for People and the P for Profit In the first phase of the

sustainability index CO2 footprint sustainable purchasing sustainable building

and sustainable land allocation will be covered

233 Japan

① Tacoma Port

In the Tacoma Port there are some programs on protecting the air water and

soil environment

In the air protection department ldquoNorthwest Ports Clean Air Strategyrdquo

ldquoGreen Gateway for Traderdquo and ldquoTruck Programrdquo had brought out to against air

pollution The concepts include using ultra-low sulfur diesel bio-diesel and other

cleaner-burning fuels in cargo-handling equipment using low-sulfur distillate

19

fuels at berth adding ldquogreen designrdquo environmental features to ships including

diesel-electric motors that save up to 30 percent in fuel and significantly reduce

emissions setting targets to change older less-efficient truck engines installing

anti-idling devices on rail-switching engines as well as partnering on other

innovative technological advance

The Port of Tacomarsquos four dockside rail yards move cargo quickly and

efficiently from container terminals They also reduce the number of trucks on

city streets and highways Each full train that leaves the Port represents 250 to 300

trucks not on our roads reducing roadway congestion and diesel emissions The

lowest emission route to ship cargo from Asia to the US Midwest is through the

Puget Sound according to the results of a study by Herbert Engineering released

in May 2009

And in the land protection program there are successful clean projects open

spaces and future habitat restoration In 2007 the Port purchased about 70 acres

of open space known as Juliarsquos Gulch and Storey Pit located between the

Tideflats and residential Northeast Tacoma Monitor water quality system is in

utilization in the water department in Tacoma Port

② Tokyo Port

In the Tokyo Port Green Port programs are almost similar with Tacoma Port

e-RTGC (Rubber Tired Gantry Crane) the barge between Tokyo and Yocohama

20

which shorten international maritime container cargo transportation land distance

super eco-shipbuilding technology dissemination and promotion green business

certification operation and shippers and logistics companies support cooperation

③ Osaka Port and Hakata Port

AMP electrical power equipment and solar power equipment are in utilization in

Osaka Port E-RTGC and solar power of refrigerated container are in utilization in

the Hakata Port

234 Korea

In Busan Port a set of Green Port took implementation such as LNG truck

E-RTGC equipment utilization eco-friendly transport means conversion (rail

canal barge) and GHG emission reduction obligation Table233

21

ltTable 233gt Summary of the Main Port of Green Port Measures

COUNTRY PORT MEASURES

US

LALB Port

Green flag AMP discharge gas reduction obligation

recommends use of alternative fuels and clean fuel

funding for the development of alternative fuels facilities

by new engine development instead of NOx emissions

green truck program (reduce70-80) low-sulfur fuel

utilization restore and revitalize the Los Cerritos

Wetlands

New York

Port

AMP modernized facilities utilization high speed hybrid

yard

Auckland

Port

Incentives on the new cleaning technology containers

transportation system

Seattle Port

AMP green ship membership Tier 4 level reducing PM

by 1994 level Smart Way program Northwest Ports

Clean Air Strategy

EU Rotterdam

Port

Clean engine (barge) green ship membership carbon

footprint calculation cruise ship which under port

authority change to use low-sulfur fuel low emission

engine development and utilization Green Award AMP

ship recycling incentives

Japan

Tokyo Port

RTGC (Rubber Tired Gantry Crane) apply for the barge

between Tokyo and Yocohama shorten international

maritime container cargo transportation land distance

super eco-shipbuilding technology dissemination and

promotion green business certification operation

shippers and logistics companies support cooperation

Osaka Port AMP electrical power equipment solar power equipment

Hakata Port E-RTGC solar power utilization in refrigerated container

Korea Busan Port

LNG truck E-RTGC eco-friendly transport means

conversion (rail canal barge) GHG emission reduction

obligation

22

24 Green Port Indicators Research

As the previous section list shown Green Port measures and programs are

substantially the same

When a ship entry in the port boundary from voyage many ports give a

incentive on shifting and utilizing sulfur-low fuel and reducing the speed under

20 miles when the ship berth in the port the alternative maritime power are

provided which replace its power generation

Next in the cargo unloading and loading department the same with above

utilization of sulfur-low fuel and electrical equipment are promoted and

eco-driving education to driver is necessary what speed is fuel fully burning and

emission minimum point

In the cargo transport department in other words truck department the

replacement on aging trucks is popular in many ports aging trucks are prohibited

close to port at the same time an incentive or support function are provided on

aging replacement The automated equipments are recommended to utilize in the

Green Port like hybrid yard tractor And a perfect plan on truck running also could

reduce the idling time and against the emission of CO2

The details reference the following Table 241

23

Table241 Green Port measures in port each department

Emission reduction programs

Ship

department

Shipping

in the

port

boundary

Obligation on the utilization of sulfur-low fuel

Reform ship engine and utilize hybrid

Speed reduce in the port entrance(a off-shore fee

incentive)

Off-shore AMP

Shift utilization system of clean fuel

Unloading and loading

department

Obligation on the utilization of sulfur-low fuel

Replace electrical equipment

Eco-driving

Truck department Hybrid yard tractor utilization

Promote aging truck replacement

Minimum the idling time

Others LED light in the Port

Develop renew and recycle resource energy

The Green Port measures in this study are e-RTGC AMP AGV Green Ship

certification system incentives on the new clean technology Green Flag(speed

reduction incentive)eco-friendly transport means conversion joint distribution

the cost on account of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction polities and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

The details and definition on each Green Port measure and the relationship with

Port Competitiveness will be expressed in next chapter

24

Chapter 3 The Relationship between Port

Competitiveness and Green Port Construction

31 Port Competitiveness Literature Review

Although past studies on port selection models have focused on port selection

made by port facilities port services port rates and charge and location

Murphy made a survey between 534 shipping companies and port authorities in

1989 and between 1850 shipping companies and port authorities in 1992

Comparing with other papers Murphys got a survey among more widely

objects In his paper port selection(port competitiveness) was seen to affected by

facilities situation appropriate pilotage max ship entrance probability the

25

capability of handling non-regular cargos whether to provide information of ship

nationality or not and port services level

In French model (1979) there are two factors affecting the port selection (port

competitiveness) endogenous factor and exogenous factor In endogenous factors

there are adequacy and physical plant condition of terminal facilities terminal rate

and charges frequency and geographic coverage of ship and freight services the

capacity of connecting to inland rails or transport net and the services provides for

the shipping or logistics And exogenous factors included the size and economic

capacity of hinterland as a source exports or market for imports national

economic situation trade policy and support established by government the

situation at home and abroad

The same as Frenchs paper in Paters paper in 1990 there are endogenous and

exogenous factors too In endogenous there are the services provides for the

shipping or logistics capacity of terminal facilities situation and condition of

facilities operation strategies established by port authority convenience to utilize

And the political situation at home and abroad social change economic factor

stabilized labor and capital However in 2004 there is a tremendous change in

Peters new paper There are four parts multi-modal process interface transport

modes infrastructure Multi-model Process part includes ship entrance rapid

speed and accuracy shipper and shipping companies reactive operation flexibility

Interface includes labor power information technology and so on And there are

26

ship calls frequency and amount of fleet factors in the transport modes part In the

infrastructure part includes port facility equipments and so on

Port facilities rates and charges services inland situation and social

circumstance factors affect the port selection and competitiveness a lot from the

research until 1992 by Murphy And in Lirn and Pater research 2003-2004 the

new and detail factors are shown to us

We can clearly see the contents in next table

27

Table 311 Prevention literature research results

Influence factors

French

(1979)

Endogenous

port facilities port rate and charges calls frequency port services

port connection with inland

Exogenous

economic size of hinterland national economic situation trade

policy home and abroad situation

Willingale

(1982)

voyage distance economy size entrance to port and route port

facilities max ship entrance probability port operation rates and

charges port authority scale of port

Slack

(1985)

cost of inland transportation port proximity ship demurrage

multi-transport

Peter

(1990)

Endogenous

port facilities condition of facilities operation strategies

convenience to utilize

Exogenous

political situation social change economic factor stabilized labor

and capital

UNCTAD

(1992)

port facilities services location level of financial industry

information communication system social circumstances economic

stability

Murphy

(1992)

facilities situation appropriate pilotage max ship entrance

probability the capability of handling non-regular cargos whether to

provide information of ship nationality or not port services level

Lirn

(2003-2004)

physical and technologic facilities geopolitical location port

operation and management shipping and terminal cost

Peter

(2004)

Multi-modal Process

ship entrance rapid speed and accuracy shipper and shipping

companies reactive operation flexibility

Interface labor and capital

Transport modes ship calls frequency and amount of fleet factors

28

And there are many experts and scholars research for the influence factors to

port selection and competitiveness in Korea The specific content follows table5

Table 312 Literature research in Korean academia

Influence factors

Jeon Il-su (1992) location facilities charges service level (EDI) terminal operation

port authority

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

( 1993 )

location facilities throughput charges service operation

situation

Kim Hak-so

(1993)

export shipping amount of annual cost of each ton of cargo

marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km of

cargo loading time

import marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km

of cargo amount of liner ship

Yeo Gi-tae (1996) location facilities throughput charge service operation situation

Ha Dong-u amp

Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

location facilities service level logistics charges environment of

logistics service

Yeo Gi-tae (1999) location facilities throughput charges service

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

throughput quay length yard area GNP

Kum Jong-su

(2001)

distance between port and cargo site terminal facilities service

the capacity of multi-transport capacity of cargo handling

administrative service rates and charges of inland transport

congestion

Yeo Gi-tae (2002) location throughput facilities service level

Kim Jin-gu (2002) port facilities location cargo amount rates and charges services

29

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005)

voyage degree to attract cargo cargo handling cost amount of

handling cargo connection to inland service reliability location

berth availability quay length feeder network depth

transshipment volumes cargo security profitability

offing degree to attract cargo berth availability cargo handling

cost transshipment volumes

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005)

cargo handling amount port facilities location rates and charges

level of service

Heo Yun-su

(2005)

port facilities rates and charges services marketing geopolitics

location economic and social circumstance

Kim Geun-seop

(2007)

port services facilities cargo handling amount location cost

productivity factor global factor

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) rates and charges services port characteristics

Many experts and scholars make a research on port selection and

competitiveness recently But the factors selection criteria are difference

Nevertheless the main factors are facilities services cost and so on

Therefore port competitiveness factors which chose in this study are port

facilities port services port rates and charges and social circumstance

However the main factors are not the whole factors any more more and more

detail factors and characteristic factors appearance Port selection and

competitiveness factors have changed And the development content is introduced

in next part

30

32 Port Competitiveness Development Tree

As mentioned above port facilities port rates and charges and port location are

the basic factors in the port selection and competitiveness

From the following table we can discover that first one facilities rates and

charges and location are the most important factor in port selection and

competitiveness second one the importance of social circumstance turns larger

inland connection is necessary all the time

Table 321 Main factor in the Pretentious Research

31

port facilities rates and

charges

inland

connection

social

circumstance location

French (1979) radic radic radic

Wiliingale (1982) radic radic

Slack (1985) radic

Pater (1990) radic radic

UNCTAD (1992) radic radic radic

Murphy(1992) radic

Jeon Il-su (1992) radic radic radic

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

(1993)

radic radic radic

Kim Hak-so

(1993) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1996) radic radic radic

Ha Dong-u

amp Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1998) radic radic radic

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

radic

Kum Jong-su

(2001) radic radic radic radic

Kim Jin-gu(2002) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(2002) radic radic

Lirn(2003-2004) radic radic radic

Pater(2004) radic

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005) radic radic radic

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005) radic radic radic

Heo Yun-su

(2005) radic radic radic radic

Kim Geun-seop

(2007) radic radic radic radic

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) radic

32

33 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green

Port Construction

Following the research above Port facilities rates and charges inland

connection and social circumstance are chose in this study port selection and

competitiveness department

e-RTGC Electric rubber tired gantry crane is a mobile gantry crane used for

stacking intermodal containers within the stacking areas of a container terminal

e-RTGC are used at container terminals and container storage yards to straddling

multiple lanes of railroad and container storage or when maximum storage

density in the container stack is desired

AMP is shorted for Alternative Marine Power and Itrsquos a facility which

provides the electric system in the land for ship which entry in the port The

facility can reduce emissions which ship get entrance in the port

AGV is a mobile robot that follows markers or wires in the floor or uses

vision or lasers They are most often used in industrial applications to move

materials around a manufacturing facility or a warehouse Automatic Guided

Vehicle systems work around-the-clock making continuous flow and just-in-time

delivery easier to achieve Application of the automatic guided vehicle has broade

33

ned during the late 20th century and they are no longer restricted to industrial

environments

The e-RTGC AMP and AGV are the new clean facilities and equipments in the

Green Port they donrsquot reduce the efficiency of handling cargo and they also

reduce the CO2 emission account

Green ship certification system if a ship utilizes clean and CO2 emission

reduction technology on the ship building adds equipment and management and

son on certification would be received And the port authority gives some

incentive and preferential treatment among 45 ports Such as a better schedule is

provided for green membership ship priority in handing cargo and discount on

entrance fee

Incentives on the new cleaning technology There are two expressions about

this measure one is that the port authority give a incentive to ship which have a

great utilization on the new cleaning technology and the other one is that

environment provide many incentives to the authority which utilize the new

cleaning technology in the port such as LED street lamp solar power cranes

Green flag The Green Flag incentive program was set up to encourage ships to

slow down in order to improve air quality The Green Flag program provides

approximately $2 million a year in discounts for vessel operators who slow their

ships to 12 knots (22kmh) or less within 20miles (32km) of the harbor

34

According to the Port the Green Flag program reduced air pollution by 600tons in

2007 and is expected to do better in 2008

All of Green ship certification system incentives on the new cleaning

technology and Green Flag are incentives provided for users of port and aimed at

reduce port rates and charges So the 3 measures belong to affect port rates and

charges

Eco-friendly transport means conversion Eco-friendly means of transport are

much accounted of green port for example railway discharge less GHG emission

than truck barge with a clean engine among the river and inshore canal

Joint distribution joint distribution is a collaborative system which port

provides among many logistics companies It can make the cargo handling speed

rapidly and reduce cargo storage time for CO2 emission reducing such as

refrigerated container In an addition it also makes the logistics companies

transport more efficient

Cost on amount of CO2 emission differenced from other port the cost on

amount of CO2 is included in the port cost The cost aims to reduce the CO2

emission directly

CO2 emission reduction policies compared with other traditional port Green

Port gives more cost discount and incentives but in an addition there are many

policies on CO2 emission restriction Such as aging trucks restrictions in inland

transport department ship entry speed reduced and fuel changed in the ship

35

department and so on Whether these restriction policies constrain port

development or not and the degree of these policies constrain port development

will be explain by the AHP results

Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors some ports in the

western countries are opened as a travel place for visitors so as to change the

polluted impress and raise the position in our heart

Cost on amount of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction policies and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors can affect the social

circumstance factor Whether these measures can or not improve the social

circumstance and port competitiveness we have to see the next calculation and

results

36

Chapter 4 The Green Port Competitiveness

Analysis

41 The Green Port Competitiveness Model by AHP

The AHP is one multi-criteria decision making method which has been

extensively applied to a variety of decision-making situations The multi-criteria

techniques are considered to be a promising framework for evaluation of

decision-making factors since they have the potential to take into account

conflicting multidimensional incommensurable and uncertain effects of

decisions explicitly

In order to apply the AHP method a hierarchical decision schema was

constructed by decomposing the decision problem into its decision elements

37

After that the importance or preferences of the decision elements are examined in

a pair-wise comparison to the elements in the hierarchy The parameters are

estimated using pair-wise comparisons between the importance of the attribute or

decision element in the function using data made by each responder Making

comparisons is a question of which of the two attributes is more import as well as

how much more important

Follow these theories the Green Port Competitiveness Model choose factors as

follow in port competitiveness factors part there are port facilities port rates and

charges inland connection social circumstance in Green Port construction part

there are e-RTGC AMP AGV green ship certification system green flag

incentives on the new cleaning technology eco-friendly transport means

conversion joint distribution CO2 emission reduction policies cost on amount of

CO2 emission beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

38

Figure 41 Green Port Competitiveness AHP model

Follow the Green Port Competitiveness AHP as shown we set a questionnaire

survey to many experts scholars working in logistics system area And we got 15

ones and 14 ones results are believable and integrated

42 Green Port Competitiveness Analysis

39

The key to construction of the factors which affects the port competitiveness

is to determine the conceptual model The selection of the factors directly affects

the evaluation of the result In order to ensure the accuracy objectivity and

practicality of evaluation results the following basic principles must be followed

when selecting factors systematic principles the principle of universal

comparability practical principle and goal-oriented principle In view of the

foregoing the competitiveness which affected by Green Port construction model

is made The analysis follows established principles of port competitiveness

evaluation taking into account the characteristics and functions of the port as well

as port facilities port services port rates and charges ship entrance inland

connection social circumstances and so on

(1) Port facilities

e-RTGC U11 AMP U12 AGV U13

(2) Port rates and charges

Green ship certification system U21 Incentives on the new clean

technology U22 Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

(3) Inland connection

Eco-friendly means of transport U31 Joint distribution U32

(4) Social circumstances

40

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41 CO2 emission reduction policies

U42 Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors U43

Table 421 Details of Level I and Level II values

Level I

indicators Symbol Level II indicators Symbol

Port facilities A1

e-RTGC U11

AMP U12

AGV U13

Port rates and

charges A2

Green ship certification system U21

Incentives on the new clean technology U22

Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

Inland

connection A3

Eco-friendly means of transport U31

Joint distribution U32

Social

circumstances A4

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41

CO2 emissions reduction policies U42

Beautiful environment construction in inner

harbors U43

41

I Determination of level I indicator weights

As the ports competitiveness evaluation indicators at this level are complex

and the elements are not easily quantified AHP is adopted to determine the

indicator weights with the basic steps as follows

(1) Establish a comparative judgment matrix The comparative judgment

matrix is obtained through comparing contributed proportion of multiple

indicators to the overall target by the judgment scale wherein the fuzzy

judgment number introduced is 1 3 5 7 and 9 and the reciprocal of

such number indicates the important degree of one element relatively to

another The results are shown in next table

Table 422 Comparison matrix of level I indicators

A1 A2 A3 A4

A1 1 15 13 3

A2 5 1 3 7

A3 3 13 1 5

A4 13 17 15 1

(2) Calculate the characteristic vector of the comparative judgment matrix

which refers to the weighted vector of the indicator The writer adopts

42

the geometric method to calculate the characteristic vector The

calculated result is as follows

ω=(012 0560 026 006)T λmax=418 It can be obtained from the table

RI=09 Wherein ω is the characteristic vector corresponding to the

maximum characteristic value λmax of the comparative judgment matrix

namely the weighted vector of the indicator RI is the average

consistency indicator as shown in following table

Table423 Average random consistency indicator RI

Matrix Order

RI

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

0 0 058 09 112 124 132 141

Matrix Order

RI

9 10 11 12 13 14 15

145 149 152 154 156 158 159

(3) Conduct consistency check on the comparative judgment matrix Adopt

the random consistency proportion CR to judge the consistency of the

comparative judgment matrix According to CI= (λmax -n)(n-1) and

CR=CIRI it can be obtained through calculation CR=007lt01 Thus

this comparative judgment matrix has a satisfactory consistency and the

indicator weight coefficient calculated through this matrix is acceptable

43

II Determination of level II indicator weights

The data at this level are the details of level Ⅰ indicator The judgment

matrix obtained through comparing multiple sub-indicators under Level Ⅰ

indicators is adopted to determine the weights of sub-indicators under each

indicator one by one The specific steps are as follows

(1) The experts score the weights within the given range To determine the

weights of several small indicators under the same big indicator it is

supposed that the score of small indicator ｋ under the indicator j made

by the expert i is Xijk wherein i=12n n is the total number of

experts ј=12m m is the total number of LevelⅡ indicator к

=12Oj Oj is the number of small indicators under the big indicator ј

іјк IJK LRC l I j k

(2) The credit rating of the expert і is l l =1 2 3 l =1 indicates this expert

is quite familiar with the evaluated contents l =2 indicator this expert is

44

with the evaluated contents l =3 indicates this expert is not quite familiar

with the evaluated contents yi1 is the=08 yi2 =05 and yi3=1

(3) The comprehensive evaluation score of small indicator l under the

indicator j is as follows

(4) The formula for normalization processing of indicator weights is as

follows and the absolute weight of the indicator set is marked as

q=(q1q2q11)

(5) Because of the same justification and principle we donrsquot give the detail

about the calculation The same with the level Ⅰ calculation we

manipulation data one by one and get 14 results And obtain the average

45

results by weighted average method The results detail as Table for the

final weights of Level-Ⅱ evaluation indicators

Above the calculation process and method are just one of data from the

questionable surveys In this study the final results are got from the

weighted average by the results of each questionable survey

The final results are shown as Table424

Table424 Indicator weights table of indicator system

Level I

indicators Weight LevelⅡ indicators

Relative

weight

Absolute

weight

Importance

percentage

Port Facilities

A1 02735

e-RTGC U11 05506 01506 1506

AMP U12 01648 00451 451

AGV U13 02826 00773 773

Port Rates and

Charges A2

02902

Green ship certification s

ystem U21 04724 01371 1371

Incentives on the new

clean technology U22 02871 00833 833

Green Flag (speed

reduction incentive)U23 02405 00698 698

Inland

connection A3

02865

Eco-friendly means of

transport U31 05942 01702 1702

Joint distribution U32 04058 01163 1163

Social

environmentA4 00863

Cost on amount of CO2

emission U41 03698 00319 319

CO2 emissions reduction

policies U42 02273 00196 196

Beautiful environment

construction in inner

harbors U43

04029 00348 348

46

III Case study

In the questionable survey we also got the mark of Green Port measures

evaluation value of many main ports such as Singapore Port Shanghai Port

Hongkong Port Busan Port LALB Port Rotterdam Port and Yocohama Port

The highest mark is 5 and lowest one is 1

Table425 Evaluation value of many main ports

Singapore

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

LALB

Port

Rotterdam

Port

Yocohama

Port

Port facilities 38000 36000 34000 38182 38000 42000 32000

Port rates and

charges 32000 36000 31000 35455 32000 39000 33000

Inland

connection 39000 34545 35000 29091 35000 45000 36000

Social

circumstance 42000 32727 41000 32000 38000 42727 36000

With the Green Port and Port competitiveness indicator weights results these

ports got the final evaluation value

47

Table426 Final evaluation value on main ports Green Port measures and

competitiveness

Rotterdam

Port

Singapore

Port

LALB

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

Yocohama

Port

394 345 330 330 319 318 317

43 Results Analysis

From the results table we can obtain the many results as following

① The main Green Port measures which are more important to improve port

competitiveness are Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system the indicator weights are 01702 01506 and

01371 among the 11 indicators

② In the Green Port construction Cost on amount of CO2 emission and CO2

emissions reduction policies are the restrictions indicators but the weight

of two indicators are not big 00319 and 00196 So effect on Green Port

construction to port competitiveness does have the weaken capacity but

not clearly strengthen more clearly Thus Green Port construction really

could improve the port competitiveness

48

③ In the case study traditional ports Rotterdam and Singapore Port give us

better examples on Green Port construction especially Rotterdam Port

④ Hongkong Busan and Yocohama Port all got a lower evaluation value

But in detail Hongkong and Yocohama Port got a lower on the port

facilities and rates and charges Busan Port got a higher on the port

facilities and rates and charges but a lower on the inland connection and

social circumstance

⑤ Shanghai Port doesnrsquot have Particular strength factors but the

comprehensive strength is not bad the same as LALB Port

49

Chapter 5 Conclusion

In this thesis the effects of Green Port construction for improving the port

competitiveness have been studied Under the definition of Green Port the

characteristics of Green Port and its effects has been shown by analysing the AHP

method which based on the questionary survey for Green Port specialists and port

officers

Follow the results of analysis on Green Port competitiveness AHP model

Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green ship certification system is

better for Green Port Construction welcome for shipping companies and citizens

who live around the port And in the analysis of Port competitiveness factors port

rates and charges always affects port competitiveness a lot As a trend inland

connection factor abstracts more attention of shipping companies

50

On the trend of port department each port should take a activity to adjust

strategy for improving its competitiveness Such as in the main ports evaluation

Busan port get a high value on port rates and charges and port facilities but as a

lower value on inland connection factor the final value is not as well as we look

forward In the evaluation of Singapore Port through it gets a lower value on rates

and charges higher value on inland connection and social circumstance causes the

final value are better So the Green Port Construction may be a trend in port

department

In the results of this thesis Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system are better solutions for Green Port Construction And

especially it can be verified that the port rates and charges always affects port

competitiveness Futhermore the investment for Green Port construction and its

effects have to be verified in the future

51

References

1 Hoyle B S and Smith J 1992 Transport and Development In Modern

transport geography edited by B S Hoyle R D Knowles (London Belhaven

Press)pp11-31

2 Beresford A K C De Souza A J R G and Pettit S J 2005 Stategic

development of liner shipping companies and terminal operators Ocean yearbook

19(Chicago 1L The University of Chicago Press) pp 732-750

3 Heaver T D 2002 Supply chain and logistics management implications for

liner shipping In The handbook of maritime economics and business edited by C

Grammenos (LondonLLP) pp 375-396

4 Park T E (2011) A Study on selection criteria of Green Port and evaluation of

major Korean port A masters thesis of graduate school of Incheon university

52

5 JeongBH (2009)Green port management policy directions in the green

growth era- The case of Gwangyang port in Republic of Korea Journal of Korea

Port Economic Association Vol25(3) p361-384

6 Lee J S Han N H(2009) A study on Green Port Revitalization According to

Air Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

7 Lee Y K Nan J W(2010)Green Logistics Policy Analysis and Implications

of Japan

8 Lee B S (2010)Tendency and Countermeasures on Green Logistics in Port

Logistics Company A masters thesis of graduate school of Korean Maritime

university

9 Lee J S (2009) A Study on Green Port Revitalization According to Air

Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

10 Zhang F Y Li Z Lu X J Yao X L(2008)Competitiveness of Inland

Ports Based on F-AHP

11 Port of Long Beach (2009) Green Port Policy wwwpolbcom

12 The port of Los Angeles wwwportoflosangelesorg

VII

항만경쟁력 강화를 위한 그린포트 구축효과 분석

Wang Liru

물류시스템공학과

한국해양대학교 대학원

국문초록

2009 년 세계 경제 위기 이후 회복세로 바뀜에 의해 항만산업의 물동량이

증가하고 선박의 대형화 및 신속화가 점차 가속화됨에 따라 항만 시장도

경쟁이 치열할 것으로 전망되어진다

한편 교토의정서가 공식 발효됨에 따라 각국에서는 대기오염에 대한 관심이

증가되고 있으며 CO2 배출량에 대한 감축 목표를 설정할 정도로 대기오염을

방지하는 자구책을 강구하고 있다 이에 따라 항만에서도 그린포트로의

전환이 불가피한 실정이다

따라서 본 연구에서는 그린포트구축 활동을 항만의 경쟁력관점에서

고찰하여 각 특징을 분석한다 또한 전문가의 설문조사를 행하고 이에 대한

VIII

AHP 분석을 통하여 그린포트 구축 활동간의 우선순위를 도출하며 구축결과가

항만의 경쟁력에 어떠한 영향을 미칠 것인지를 고찰한다

IX

List of Figures

Figure 11 Research Process 4

Figure 21 Green Port appearance and basic definition 10

Figure 41 Green Port Competitiveness AHP model 38

X

List of Tables

Table 211 Objective of CO2 reduces in main countries 8

Table 221 4kinds Green Port construction promote directions 11

Table 231 Details of LALB Port Green Port Promotion Programs 13

Table 232 Short term and Long term Green Port Plans in Auckland Port 16

Table 233 Summary of the Main Port of Green Port Measures 21

Table 241 Green Port measures in port each department 23

Table 311 Prevention literature research results 27

Table 312 Literature research in Korean academia 28

Table 321 Main factor in the Pretentious Research 31

Table 421 Details of Level I and Level II values 40

Table 422 Comparison matrix of level I indicators 41

Table 423 Average random consistency indicator RI 42

Table 424 Indicator weights table of indicator system 45

Table 425 Evaluation value of many main ports 46

Table 426 Final evaluation value on main ports Green Port measures and

competitiveness 47

XI

CONTENT

Abstract V

List of Figures IX

List of Tables X

Chapter 1 Introduction 1

11 Research background and objective 1

12 Scope and structure of research 3

Chapter 2 Green Port Construction Situation 6

21 Green Port Construction Background 6

22 The Definition of Green Port 9

23 Green Port Construction Situation in major countries 12

24 Green Port Indicators Research 22

Chapter 3 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green Port

Construction 24

31 Port Competitiveness Literature Review 24

32 Port Competitiveness Development Tree 30

33 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green Port

Construction 32

Chapter 4 The Green Port Competitiveness Analysis 36

41 The Green Port Competitiveness Model by AHP 36

42 Green Port Competitiveness Analysis 38

XII

43 Results Analysis 47

Chapter 5 Conclusion 49

References 51

1

Chapter 1 Introduction

11 Research background and objective

The Kyoto Protocol is an international agreement linked to the United Nations

Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) The major feature of the

Kyoto Protocol is that it sets binding targets for 37 industrialized countries and the

European community for reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to fight

global warming These amounts will be lower an average of five per cent based on

1990 levels over the five-year period 2008-2012 The protocol was initially

adopted on 11 December 1997 in Japan but entered into force on 16 February

2005 As of July 2010 191 countries and states have signed and ratified the

protocol

2

After ltKyoto Protocolgt has brought out in 1997 more and more people put

their attention on environment pollution Rapid development in industry

department brings out air water soil noise and wildlife pollution and destruction

As the health development of economic alleviating environmental pollution and

restoring original ecology extremely necessary

Focus on the long-term and future development in the port many counties

government and ports authorities pay attentions on Green Port construction

In the short term C40 World Ports Climate Conference draws up some

adaptive plans among big cities and major ports The plans include the incentives

provided to green ship user cooperation among the C40 member ports

encouragement to develop and utilize the Alternative Maritime Power and so on

In EU Green Port major policies is prohibition the ship utilization on fuel

which sulfur content over 2 (after Jun2010 the limitation of sulfur content is

1) There are also Marco Polo I and Marco Polo II plans in EU In Marco Polo I

Modal Shift Action Catalyst Action and Common Learning Action are included

from 2003 to 2006 And after 2007 in Marco II Motorways of the Sea Action

Traffic Avoidance Actions and Rail Synergy are added

In US people pay more attention to developing the new technology for

reducing CO2 emission Such as power generator and renewable resources and

Northwest Ports Clean Air Strategy

3

Compared with other departments green policy in port department is explained

as green maritime and green shipping For example super-eco ship building and

Modal Shift promotion

The same aim to Hong Kong Ports AMP E-RTG hybrid truck bio-diesel

recycling energy CNG LNG and development are in utilization

ldquoGreen Growth Policyrdquo is the measure which brought out by the Korean

government Follow this strategy Korean port authority also takes out the ldquoGreen

Port building comprehensive planrdquo Furthermore low carbon self-sufficiency port

the disaster safety port eco-friendly port and resource recycling port are the

understandings on the Korean ldquoGreen Growth Policyrdquo

As the port support policies being changed port competitiveness factors are

changed Especially the importance degree of each factor has been changed a

lot The purpose of this study is explaining the competitiveness effects changed

which taking Green Port measures and programs port and give a better advice and

suggestion to Green Port construction

12 Scope and structure of research

The method to analysis the effects of Green Port construction for improving

port competitiveness is AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process)

4

And research process in this study is shown in ltFigure 1gt

ltFigure 1gt Research process

In chapter 1 research background and objective research method and process

are included And chapter 2 introduces the Green Port construction background

definition the Green Port construction situation in many countries and each

department introduction in Green Port construction The chapter 3 views the

literature on port competitiveness and obtains the influence factors used in this

study trend and relationship between port competitiveness The chapter 4 based

5

on the survey data and calculates each indicator importance degree by AHP

method and analysis the result Finally in chapter 5 the conclusion summary the

whole study by the result analysis

6

Chapter 2 Green Port Construction Situation

21 Green Port Construction Background

As the United Nations Secretary General has said the greatest challenge which

we are facing is environmental regulators It is a growing crisis with economic

health and safety food production security and other dimensions

The Kyoto Protocol is an international agreement linked to the United Nations

Framework Convention on Climate Change The major feature of the Kyoto

Protocol is that it sets binding targets for 37 industrialized countries and the

European community for reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to fight

global warming These amount to an average of five percent bellow 1990 level

over the five-year period 2008-2012

The protocol was initially adopted on 11 December 1997 in Japan but all of the

member countries entered into force on16 February 2005 The Kyoto Protocol

7

was adopted in Kyoto Japan on 11 December 1997 and entered into force on 16

February 2005 The detailed rules for the implementation of the Protocol were

adopted at COP 7 in Marrakesh in 2001 and are called the ldquoMarrakesh Accordsrdquo

Follow the ltKyoto Protocolgt several flexible mechanisms are allowed Such

as emissions trading the clean development mechanism (CDM) and joint

implementation The mechanisms allow AnnexⅠcounties to meet their GHG

emission limitations by purchasing GHG emission reductions credits from

elsewhere through financial exchanges projects that reduce emissions in

non-Annex Ⅰ countries or Annex Ⅰ countries with excess allowances The

mechanisms help stimulate green investment and help Parties meet their emission

targets in a cost-effective way

Therefore many countries take action on reducing the GHG discharge emission

For example increase the energy utilization efficiency develop the solar power

wind energy tidal energy and other clean energy in their industry The details

about objective of GHG emission reduction in main countries are displayed as the

following ltTable 1gt

8

ltTable 1gt Objective of CO2 reduce in main countries

Bench

mark of

Year

Objective

()

Absolute

quantity

()

Remark

EU 1990 20~30 -20~-30 Norway New Zealand 40 reducing

USA 2005 17 -3 Passed by House of Representatives

Japan 1990 25 -25 On the premise of attention with China

India

Korea 2020

(BAU) 30 mdashmdash

Discharge amount is up to 564million don

in estimation

China 2005 40~50 60~150

(2005) Each GDP

India 2005 20-25 mdashmdash With the developed countries

participation

Russia 1990 25 -25 Be neutral country

Norway 1990 30~40 -30~-40 mdashmdash

New

Zealand 1990 10~20 -10~ -20 mdashmdash

Austria 2000 5~25 -3~-11 mdashmdash

Canada 2003 20 -3 mdashmdash

Mexico 2002 50 mdashmdash With the developed countries

participation

South

Africa

2020

(BAU) 34 mdashmdash

With the developed countries

participation

Brazil 2020

(BAU) 36~39

-20

(2005) mdashmdash

(Korean Maritime Institute 20095)

9

22 The Definition of Green Port

As the global warming affecting in the world climate has been heavily changed

natural disaster frequently occurred natural resources depletion and supply

imbalance cause crisis to reach a high level For the purpose of getting away from

financial crisis and creating the new growth motivity the counties in the world

make more efforts on developing economic

Because of the realization of this global climate and environment crisis Korean

government had brought out the ldquoGreen Growth Policyrdquo And it made the ldquoGreen

Growth Policyrdquo be embodied and law-governed announced ldquoLow Carbon Green

Growth of the Basic Lawrdquo

In order to coordinate with this policy and law build up the ldquoGreen Growthrdquo

everyone make their efforts and reach ldquoGreen Growthrdquo in Korea each department

As a important industry department port authority also take activity to match the

national strategy of ldquoGreen Growthrdquo and draw up the plan on ldquoGreen Portrdquo

construction

However there isnrsquot a clear definition about the Green Port Korean Land

Transport and Maritime Ministry have explained the Green Port as follows Green

house gas Reducing Energy Effciencing Nature-friendly Port The explanation is

very easy to understand but from a professional point of view it not very

10

comprehensive and concrete So we have to understand the concept in the Green

Port Construction measures and programs There are about 4 kind explanation and

promotion programs in the Green Port Respectively the port which based on

green technology and green business creating new growth motive improving

living standards jumping in the ranks of the advanced port

ltFigure 2gt Green Port appearance and basic definition

In the Green Growth National Strategy Policy there are 10 pieces of policy

directions and 50 researches each department should choose the appropriate one

Follow these researches chose by port availability especially Low Carbon

11

Self-sufficiency Port The Disaster Safety Port Eco-friendly Port Resource

Recycling Port and in this study Green Port construction is a plan on

comprehensive and mix of 4kinds of Green Port Construction

Table 221 Four Promotions for Green Port Construction

Promotion Program

(Green Port type) Activities

Low-Carbon

Self-Sufficiency Port

Eco-friendly inland transportation system building

New renewable resources power equipment utilization

AMP LED utilization

The Disaster Safety

Port

Disaster Prevention environment infrastructure building

Disaster prediction and corresponding system utilization

Eco-Friendly Port Beauty the port by green park planting and so on

Provide eco-friendly port building programs

Resource Recycling

Port

Port waste (silt soil) effectively recycling system

Establish resource recycling port paragon

As table1 shown each type of Green Port has a separate emphasis

Eco-friendly inland transportation system which encourages utilizing rail canal

barge clean system reduces the truck application amount AMP means

Alternative Maritime Power supply system replaces with ship power generation

The Green Port construction in most of counties is the low-carbon self-sufficiency

12

port And in their construction maybe add a few other type promote director like

beauty the port by green park planting and so on

However in this study the Green Port concept is a comprehensive plan among

4 types not a specialization system

23 Green Port Construction Situation in major countries

After ltKyoto protocolgt having brought out each department began to take

affords on the reducing the GHG (greenhouse gas) emission In port department

the activities are embodied in the Green Port construction In this study many

major ports in US EU Japan and Korea are chose to explain for research

231 US

① LALB Port

In order to achieve to reduce marine pollutants standby and build clean port

LALB Port standby resource ministry and environment protection ministry

signed a 5year plan on clean standby action cooperation

This promotion business plan set a set of marine pollutants standby emission

limitation on the ship department from the statistics year 2006-2007 to 2010-2011

handling department heavy duty equipment truck department and so on Such as

13

in Green Port Technology construction department measures and programs are

shown in following Table

Table231 the details of LALB Port Green Port Promotion Programs

Promotion Program

Heavy Equipment Truck

Heavy Equipment

Replace and Update Aging Facilities

Substitute Fuels and Clean Fuel Incentives

Budgetary for the Development of Substitute Fuels

Marine Vessels Tugs

Ship Speed Reduction within the Port

Electrical supply of parking in the Berth

Use low-sulfur fuel (supplementary motor)

Handling Equipment

Air Quality Monitoring

Measure ambient air pollution levels in the vicinity of

the Port

Include a number of real-time air quality measurements

On the restrict situation of heavy equipment trucks and others vessels must to

be replaced and rebuilt in order to minimum the emission of NOx And the trucks

which donrsquot reach the regulate standard do not allowed to get in the port These

regulations will help their owner to replace and update trucks and also set up a

replacement plan to 16000 aging trucks make the replace done by 2012 As

foundation repaired the cargo owner must to pay an addition tax about 20ft 35$

40ft 79$

14

In the maritime department the speed reduction incentive took action in

Jan2005 When ship entry into the port boundary speed must be reduced under

20 miles 12kont At the beginning the effect of this plan is very clearly so the

limitation may be raised to 40mile And AMP (Alternative Maritime Power ) is

encouraged to be built and developed as to ship use their engine and get GHG

emission

② New York- New Jersey Port

The New York- New Jersey Port Authority brought out environment policy on

CO2 emission reduction The main concepts as following first reduce PX SOX

3 each year and CO2 5 Second ship must utilize sulfur-low fuel as a

obligation Third AMP is provided Forth modern the unloading and loading

equipment must be built Fifth promote trucks replacement Sixth reform the ship

engine Seventh invent 9 billion dollars in the following 10 years Eighth invent

to all hybrid equipment (325) Ninth install the hybrid truck in AMPT and

NYCT

③ Seattle Port

15

In Seattle Port Air Environment Maritime Improvement plan has been

accepted in 2005 The plan includes first set up Puget Sound Maritime Air

Forum and make one AMP provide services for two tour ships second change

the diesel hybrid equipment into electric utilization Third use bio-diesel and

diesel catalyst and reduce the emission Forth emphasize the standard and plan of

truck minimum the idling time

Seattle Port Tacoma Port and Vancouver made a assignment and promote

ldquoNorthwest Ports Clean Air Strategyrdquo

④ Auckland Port

Auckland Port set up the aging replacement plan in 2008 and invent 20 milion

dollars gas emission should reach the level And cargo transport system in port

hinterland port authority and Air environment management committee make

cooperation and give an incentive to truck which use new clean technology

Table232 Short term and Long term Green Port Plans in Auckland Port

16

17

232 EU

Rotterdam Port

As the biggest Port in EU Rotterdam Port takes more affords in reducing the

CO2 emission Main programs are low carbon footprint AMP and so on The

limitation of CO2 emission reduces down 50 of 1990 by 2025

In July 2008 the authority of Rotterdam port gave international cooperation

with other ports an extra boost by organizing the World Ports Climate Conference

During this conference the authority of Rotterdam discussed possible ways in

which ports and business could reduce air pollution and CO2 emissions The

proposals the authority of Rotterdam was set out in a declaration which was

supported by all 55 port cities attending the conference The conference resulted

in five projects to improve air quality and reduce CO2 emissions The authority of

Rotterdam is behind the project to further elaborate an Environmental Ship Index

The Rotterdam Climate Initiative is a joint venture with the municipality of

Rotterdam DCMR Environmental Protection Agency Rijnmond and Deltalinqs

Common goal is to halve CO2 emissions in the region by 2025 in comparison with

1990 levels In connection with the Rotterdam Climate Initiative the port works

on (together with DCMR and others) creating an infrastructure for the capture

18

transport and storage of CO2 A business case presented in the summer of 2008 is

now being elaborated into a business plan The business case concludes that

Rotterdam can begin in 2015 with the capture transport and underground storage

of five million tons of CO2 per annum This means that the basic infrastructure

will then be in place for further growth in capture and storage to twenty million

tons in 2025

In 2008 a start was made on the development of a sustainability index for

activities relating to the P for Planet (environment) In 2009 it will further expand

the index to cover the P for People and the P for Profit In the first phase of the

sustainability index CO2 footprint sustainable purchasing sustainable building

and sustainable land allocation will be covered

233 Japan

① Tacoma Port

In the Tacoma Port there are some programs on protecting the air water and

soil environment

In the air protection department ldquoNorthwest Ports Clean Air Strategyrdquo

ldquoGreen Gateway for Traderdquo and ldquoTruck Programrdquo had brought out to against air

pollution The concepts include using ultra-low sulfur diesel bio-diesel and other

cleaner-burning fuels in cargo-handling equipment using low-sulfur distillate

19

fuels at berth adding ldquogreen designrdquo environmental features to ships including

diesel-electric motors that save up to 30 percent in fuel and significantly reduce

emissions setting targets to change older less-efficient truck engines installing

anti-idling devices on rail-switching engines as well as partnering on other

innovative technological advance

The Port of Tacomarsquos four dockside rail yards move cargo quickly and

efficiently from container terminals They also reduce the number of trucks on

city streets and highways Each full train that leaves the Port represents 250 to 300

trucks not on our roads reducing roadway congestion and diesel emissions The

lowest emission route to ship cargo from Asia to the US Midwest is through the

Puget Sound according to the results of a study by Herbert Engineering released

in May 2009

And in the land protection program there are successful clean projects open

spaces and future habitat restoration In 2007 the Port purchased about 70 acres

of open space known as Juliarsquos Gulch and Storey Pit located between the

Tideflats and residential Northeast Tacoma Monitor water quality system is in

utilization in the water department in Tacoma Port

② Tokyo Port

In the Tokyo Port Green Port programs are almost similar with Tacoma Port

e-RTGC (Rubber Tired Gantry Crane) the barge between Tokyo and Yocohama

20

which shorten international maritime container cargo transportation land distance

super eco-shipbuilding technology dissemination and promotion green business

certification operation and shippers and logistics companies support cooperation

③ Osaka Port and Hakata Port

AMP electrical power equipment and solar power equipment are in utilization in

Osaka Port E-RTGC and solar power of refrigerated container are in utilization in

the Hakata Port

234 Korea

In Busan Port a set of Green Port took implementation such as LNG truck

E-RTGC equipment utilization eco-friendly transport means conversion (rail

canal barge) and GHG emission reduction obligation Table233

21

ltTable 233gt Summary of the Main Port of Green Port Measures

COUNTRY PORT MEASURES

US

LALB Port

Green flag AMP discharge gas reduction obligation

recommends use of alternative fuels and clean fuel

funding for the development of alternative fuels facilities

by new engine development instead of NOx emissions

green truck program (reduce70-80) low-sulfur fuel

utilization restore and revitalize the Los Cerritos

Wetlands

New York

Port

AMP modernized facilities utilization high speed hybrid

yard

Auckland

Port

Incentives on the new cleaning technology containers

transportation system

Seattle Port

AMP green ship membership Tier 4 level reducing PM

by 1994 level Smart Way program Northwest Ports

Clean Air Strategy

EU Rotterdam

Port

Clean engine (barge) green ship membership carbon

footprint calculation cruise ship which under port

authority change to use low-sulfur fuel low emission

engine development and utilization Green Award AMP

ship recycling incentives

Japan

Tokyo Port

RTGC (Rubber Tired Gantry Crane) apply for the barge

between Tokyo and Yocohama shorten international

maritime container cargo transportation land distance

super eco-shipbuilding technology dissemination and

promotion green business certification operation

shippers and logistics companies support cooperation

Osaka Port AMP electrical power equipment solar power equipment

Hakata Port E-RTGC solar power utilization in refrigerated container

Korea Busan Port

LNG truck E-RTGC eco-friendly transport means

conversion (rail canal barge) GHG emission reduction

obligation

22

24 Green Port Indicators Research

As the previous section list shown Green Port measures and programs are

substantially the same

When a ship entry in the port boundary from voyage many ports give a

incentive on shifting and utilizing sulfur-low fuel and reducing the speed under

20 miles when the ship berth in the port the alternative maritime power are

provided which replace its power generation

Next in the cargo unloading and loading department the same with above

utilization of sulfur-low fuel and electrical equipment are promoted and

eco-driving education to driver is necessary what speed is fuel fully burning and

emission minimum point

In the cargo transport department in other words truck department the

replacement on aging trucks is popular in many ports aging trucks are prohibited

close to port at the same time an incentive or support function are provided on

aging replacement The automated equipments are recommended to utilize in the

Green Port like hybrid yard tractor And a perfect plan on truck running also could

reduce the idling time and against the emission of CO2

The details reference the following Table 241

23

Table241 Green Port measures in port each department

Emission reduction programs

Ship

department

Shipping

in the

port

boundary

Obligation on the utilization of sulfur-low fuel

Reform ship engine and utilize hybrid

Speed reduce in the port entrance(a off-shore fee

incentive)

Off-shore AMP

Shift utilization system of clean fuel

Unloading and loading

department

Obligation on the utilization of sulfur-low fuel

Replace electrical equipment

Eco-driving

Truck department Hybrid yard tractor utilization

Promote aging truck replacement

Minimum the idling time

Others LED light in the Port

Develop renew and recycle resource energy

The Green Port measures in this study are e-RTGC AMP AGV Green Ship

certification system incentives on the new clean technology Green Flag(speed

reduction incentive)eco-friendly transport means conversion joint distribution

the cost on account of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction polities and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

The details and definition on each Green Port measure and the relationship with

Port Competitiveness will be expressed in next chapter

24

Chapter 3 The Relationship between Port

Competitiveness and Green Port Construction

31 Port Competitiveness Literature Review

Although past studies on port selection models have focused on port selection

made by port facilities port services port rates and charge and location

Murphy made a survey between 534 shipping companies and port authorities in

1989 and between 1850 shipping companies and port authorities in 1992

Comparing with other papers Murphys got a survey among more widely

objects In his paper port selection(port competitiveness) was seen to affected by

facilities situation appropriate pilotage max ship entrance probability the

25

capability of handling non-regular cargos whether to provide information of ship

nationality or not and port services level

In French model (1979) there are two factors affecting the port selection (port

competitiveness) endogenous factor and exogenous factor In endogenous factors

there are adequacy and physical plant condition of terminal facilities terminal rate

and charges frequency and geographic coverage of ship and freight services the

capacity of connecting to inland rails or transport net and the services provides for

the shipping or logistics And exogenous factors included the size and economic

capacity of hinterland as a source exports or market for imports national

economic situation trade policy and support established by government the

situation at home and abroad

The same as Frenchs paper in Paters paper in 1990 there are endogenous and

exogenous factors too In endogenous there are the services provides for the

shipping or logistics capacity of terminal facilities situation and condition of

facilities operation strategies established by port authority convenience to utilize

And the political situation at home and abroad social change economic factor

stabilized labor and capital However in 2004 there is a tremendous change in

Peters new paper There are four parts multi-modal process interface transport

modes infrastructure Multi-model Process part includes ship entrance rapid

speed and accuracy shipper and shipping companies reactive operation flexibility

Interface includes labor power information technology and so on And there are

26

ship calls frequency and amount of fleet factors in the transport modes part In the

infrastructure part includes port facility equipments and so on

Port facilities rates and charges services inland situation and social

circumstance factors affect the port selection and competitiveness a lot from the

research until 1992 by Murphy And in Lirn and Pater research 2003-2004 the

new and detail factors are shown to us

We can clearly see the contents in next table

27

Table 311 Prevention literature research results

Influence factors

French

(1979)

Endogenous

port facilities port rate and charges calls frequency port services

port connection with inland

Exogenous

economic size of hinterland national economic situation trade

policy home and abroad situation

Willingale

(1982)

voyage distance economy size entrance to port and route port

facilities max ship entrance probability port operation rates and

charges port authority scale of port

Slack

(1985)

cost of inland transportation port proximity ship demurrage

multi-transport

Peter

(1990)

Endogenous

port facilities condition of facilities operation strategies

convenience to utilize

Exogenous

political situation social change economic factor stabilized labor

and capital

UNCTAD

(1992)

port facilities services location level of financial industry

information communication system social circumstances economic

stability

Murphy

(1992)

facilities situation appropriate pilotage max ship entrance

probability the capability of handling non-regular cargos whether to

provide information of ship nationality or not port services level

Lirn

(2003-2004)

physical and technologic facilities geopolitical location port

operation and management shipping and terminal cost

Peter

(2004)

Multi-modal Process

ship entrance rapid speed and accuracy shipper and shipping

companies reactive operation flexibility

Interface labor and capital

Transport modes ship calls frequency and amount of fleet factors

28

And there are many experts and scholars research for the influence factors to

port selection and competitiveness in Korea The specific content follows table5

Table 312 Literature research in Korean academia

Influence factors

Jeon Il-su (1992) location facilities charges service level (EDI) terminal operation

port authority

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

( 1993 )

location facilities throughput charges service operation

situation

Kim Hak-so

(1993)

export shipping amount of annual cost of each ton of cargo

marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km of

cargo loading time

import marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km

of cargo amount of liner ship

Yeo Gi-tae (1996) location facilities throughput charge service operation situation

Ha Dong-u amp

Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

location facilities service level logistics charges environment of

logistics service

Yeo Gi-tae (1999) location facilities throughput charges service

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

throughput quay length yard area GNP

Kum Jong-su

(2001)

distance between port and cargo site terminal facilities service

the capacity of multi-transport capacity of cargo handling

administrative service rates and charges of inland transport

congestion

Yeo Gi-tae (2002) location throughput facilities service level

Kim Jin-gu (2002) port facilities location cargo amount rates and charges services

29

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005)

voyage degree to attract cargo cargo handling cost amount of

handling cargo connection to inland service reliability location

berth availability quay length feeder network depth

transshipment volumes cargo security profitability

offing degree to attract cargo berth availability cargo handling

cost transshipment volumes

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005)

cargo handling amount port facilities location rates and charges

level of service

Heo Yun-su

(2005)

port facilities rates and charges services marketing geopolitics

location economic and social circumstance

Kim Geun-seop

(2007)

port services facilities cargo handling amount location cost

productivity factor global factor

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) rates and charges services port characteristics

Many experts and scholars make a research on port selection and

competitiveness recently But the factors selection criteria are difference

Nevertheless the main factors are facilities services cost and so on

Therefore port competitiveness factors which chose in this study are port

facilities port services port rates and charges and social circumstance

However the main factors are not the whole factors any more more and more

detail factors and characteristic factors appearance Port selection and

competitiveness factors have changed And the development content is introduced

in next part

30

32 Port Competitiveness Development Tree

As mentioned above port facilities port rates and charges and port location are

the basic factors in the port selection and competitiveness

From the following table we can discover that first one facilities rates and

charges and location are the most important factor in port selection and

competitiveness second one the importance of social circumstance turns larger

inland connection is necessary all the time

Table 321 Main factor in the Pretentious Research

31

port facilities rates and

charges

inland

connection

social

circumstance location

French (1979) radic radic radic

Wiliingale (1982) radic radic

Slack (1985) radic

Pater (1990) radic radic

UNCTAD (1992) radic radic radic

Murphy(1992) radic

Jeon Il-su (1992) radic radic radic

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

(1993)

radic radic radic

Kim Hak-so

(1993) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1996) radic radic radic

Ha Dong-u

amp Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1998) radic radic radic

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

radic

Kum Jong-su

(2001) radic radic radic radic

Kim Jin-gu(2002) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(2002) radic radic

Lirn(2003-2004) radic radic radic

Pater(2004) radic

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005) radic radic radic

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005) radic radic radic

Heo Yun-su

(2005) radic radic radic radic

Kim Geun-seop

(2007) radic radic radic radic

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) radic

32

33 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green

Port Construction

Following the research above Port facilities rates and charges inland

connection and social circumstance are chose in this study port selection and

competitiveness department

e-RTGC Electric rubber tired gantry crane is a mobile gantry crane used for

stacking intermodal containers within the stacking areas of a container terminal

e-RTGC are used at container terminals and container storage yards to straddling

multiple lanes of railroad and container storage or when maximum storage

density in the container stack is desired

AMP is shorted for Alternative Marine Power and Itrsquos a facility which

provides the electric system in the land for ship which entry in the port The

facility can reduce emissions which ship get entrance in the port

AGV is a mobile robot that follows markers or wires in the floor or uses

vision or lasers They are most often used in industrial applications to move

materials around a manufacturing facility or a warehouse Automatic Guided

Vehicle systems work around-the-clock making continuous flow and just-in-time

delivery easier to achieve Application of the automatic guided vehicle has broade

33

ned during the late 20th century and they are no longer restricted to industrial

environments

The e-RTGC AMP and AGV are the new clean facilities and equipments in the

Green Port they donrsquot reduce the efficiency of handling cargo and they also

reduce the CO2 emission account

Green ship certification system if a ship utilizes clean and CO2 emission

reduction technology on the ship building adds equipment and management and

son on certification would be received And the port authority gives some

incentive and preferential treatment among 45 ports Such as a better schedule is

provided for green membership ship priority in handing cargo and discount on

entrance fee

Incentives on the new cleaning technology There are two expressions about

this measure one is that the port authority give a incentive to ship which have a

great utilization on the new cleaning technology and the other one is that

environment provide many incentives to the authority which utilize the new

cleaning technology in the port such as LED street lamp solar power cranes

Green flag The Green Flag incentive program was set up to encourage ships to

slow down in order to improve air quality The Green Flag program provides

approximately $2 million a year in discounts for vessel operators who slow their

ships to 12 knots (22kmh) or less within 20miles (32km) of the harbor

34

According to the Port the Green Flag program reduced air pollution by 600tons in

2007 and is expected to do better in 2008

All of Green ship certification system incentives on the new cleaning

technology and Green Flag are incentives provided for users of port and aimed at

reduce port rates and charges So the 3 measures belong to affect port rates and

charges

Eco-friendly transport means conversion Eco-friendly means of transport are

much accounted of green port for example railway discharge less GHG emission

than truck barge with a clean engine among the river and inshore canal

Joint distribution joint distribution is a collaborative system which port

provides among many logistics companies It can make the cargo handling speed

rapidly and reduce cargo storage time for CO2 emission reducing such as

refrigerated container In an addition it also makes the logistics companies

transport more efficient

Cost on amount of CO2 emission differenced from other port the cost on

amount of CO2 is included in the port cost The cost aims to reduce the CO2

emission directly

CO2 emission reduction policies compared with other traditional port Green

Port gives more cost discount and incentives but in an addition there are many

policies on CO2 emission restriction Such as aging trucks restrictions in inland

transport department ship entry speed reduced and fuel changed in the ship

35

department and so on Whether these restriction policies constrain port

development or not and the degree of these policies constrain port development

will be explain by the AHP results

Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors some ports in the

western countries are opened as a travel place for visitors so as to change the

polluted impress and raise the position in our heart

Cost on amount of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction policies and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors can affect the social

circumstance factor Whether these measures can or not improve the social

circumstance and port competitiveness we have to see the next calculation and

results

36

Chapter 4 The Green Port Competitiveness

Analysis

41 The Green Port Competitiveness Model by AHP

The AHP is one multi-criteria decision making method which has been

extensively applied to a variety of decision-making situations The multi-criteria

techniques are considered to be a promising framework for evaluation of

decision-making factors since they have the potential to take into account

conflicting multidimensional incommensurable and uncertain effects of

decisions explicitly

In order to apply the AHP method a hierarchical decision schema was

constructed by decomposing the decision problem into its decision elements

37

After that the importance or preferences of the decision elements are examined in

a pair-wise comparison to the elements in the hierarchy The parameters are

estimated using pair-wise comparisons between the importance of the attribute or

decision element in the function using data made by each responder Making

comparisons is a question of which of the two attributes is more import as well as

how much more important

Follow these theories the Green Port Competitiveness Model choose factors as

follow in port competitiveness factors part there are port facilities port rates and

charges inland connection social circumstance in Green Port construction part

there are e-RTGC AMP AGV green ship certification system green flag

incentives on the new cleaning technology eco-friendly transport means

conversion joint distribution CO2 emission reduction policies cost on amount of

CO2 emission beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

38

Figure 41 Green Port Competitiveness AHP model

Follow the Green Port Competitiveness AHP as shown we set a questionnaire

survey to many experts scholars working in logistics system area And we got 15

ones and 14 ones results are believable and integrated

42 Green Port Competitiveness Analysis

39

The key to construction of the factors which affects the port competitiveness

is to determine the conceptual model The selection of the factors directly affects

the evaluation of the result In order to ensure the accuracy objectivity and

practicality of evaluation results the following basic principles must be followed

when selecting factors systematic principles the principle of universal

comparability practical principle and goal-oriented principle In view of the

foregoing the competitiveness which affected by Green Port construction model

is made The analysis follows established principles of port competitiveness

evaluation taking into account the characteristics and functions of the port as well

as port facilities port services port rates and charges ship entrance inland

connection social circumstances and so on

(1) Port facilities

e-RTGC U11 AMP U12 AGV U13

(2) Port rates and charges

Green ship certification system U21 Incentives on the new clean

technology U22 Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

(3) Inland connection

Eco-friendly means of transport U31 Joint distribution U32

(4) Social circumstances

40

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41 CO2 emission reduction policies

U42 Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors U43

Table 421 Details of Level I and Level II values

Level I

indicators Symbol Level II indicators Symbol

Port facilities A1

e-RTGC U11

AMP U12

AGV U13

Port rates and

charges A2

Green ship certification system U21

Incentives on the new clean technology U22

Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

Inland

connection A3

Eco-friendly means of transport U31

Joint distribution U32

Social

circumstances A4

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41

CO2 emissions reduction policies U42

Beautiful environment construction in inner

harbors U43

41

I Determination of level I indicator weights

As the ports competitiveness evaluation indicators at this level are complex

and the elements are not easily quantified AHP is adopted to determine the

indicator weights with the basic steps as follows

(1) Establish a comparative judgment matrix The comparative judgment

matrix is obtained through comparing contributed proportion of multiple

indicators to the overall target by the judgment scale wherein the fuzzy

judgment number introduced is 1 3 5 7 and 9 and the reciprocal of

such number indicates the important degree of one element relatively to

another The results are shown in next table

Table 422 Comparison matrix of level I indicators

A1 A2 A3 A4

A1 1 15 13 3

A2 5 1 3 7

A3 3 13 1 5

A4 13 17 15 1

(2) Calculate the characteristic vector of the comparative judgment matrix

which refers to the weighted vector of the indicator The writer adopts

42

the geometric method to calculate the characteristic vector The

calculated result is as follows

ω=(012 0560 026 006)T λmax=418 It can be obtained from the table

RI=09 Wherein ω is the characteristic vector corresponding to the

maximum characteristic value λmax of the comparative judgment matrix

namely the weighted vector of the indicator RI is the average

consistency indicator as shown in following table

Table423 Average random consistency indicator RI

Matrix Order

RI

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

0 0 058 09 112 124 132 141

Matrix Order

RI

9 10 11 12 13 14 15

145 149 152 154 156 158 159

(3) Conduct consistency check on the comparative judgment matrix Adopt

the random consistency proportion CR to judge the consistency of the

comparative judgment matrix According to CI= (λmax -n)(n-1) and

CR=CIRI it can be obtained through calculation CR=007lt01 Thus

this comparative judgment matrix has a satisfactory consistency and the

indicator weight coefficient calculated through this matrix is acceptable

43

II Determination of level II indicator weights

The data at this level are the details of level Ⅰ indicator The judgment

matrix obtained through comparing multiple sub-indicators under Level Ⅰ

indicators is adopted to determine the weights of sub-indicators under each

indicator one by one The specific steps are as follows

(1) The experts score the weights within the given range To determine the

weights of several small indicators under the same big indicator it is

supposed that the score of small indicator ｋ under the indicator j made

by the expert i is Xijk wherein i=12n n is the total number of

experts ј=12m m is the total number of LevelⅡ indicator к

=12Oj Oj is the number of small indicators under the big indicator ј

іјк IJK LRC l I j k

(2) The credit rating of the expert і is l l =1 2 3 l =1 indicates this expert

is quite familiar with the evaluated contents l =2 indicator this expert is

44

with the evaluated contents l =3 indicates this expert is not quite familiar

with the evaluated contents yi1 is the=08 yi2 =05 and yi3=1

(3) The comprehensive evaluation score of small indicator l under the

indicator j is as follows

(4) The formula for normalization processing of indicator weights is as

follows and the absolute weight of the indicator set is marked as

q=(q1q2q11)

(5) Because of the same justification and principle we donrsquot give the detail

about the calculation The same with the level Ⅰ calculation we

manipulation data one by one and get 14 results And obtain the average

45

results by weighted average method The results detail as Table for the

final weights of Level-Ⅱ evaluation indicators

Above the calculation process and method are just one of data from the

questionable surveys In this study the final results are got from the

weighted average by the results of each questionable survey

The final results are shown as Table424

Table424 Indicator weights table of indicator system

Level I

indicators Weight LevelⅡ indicators

Relative

weight

Absolute

weight

Importance

percentage

Port Facilities

A1 02735

e-RTGC U11 05506 01506 1506

AMP U12 01648 00451 451

AGV U13 02826 00773 773

Port Rates and

Charges A2

02902

Green ship certification s

ystem U21 04724 01371 1371

Incentives on the new

clean technology U22 02871 00833 833

Green Flag (speed

reduction incentive)U23 02405 00698 698

Inland

connection A3

02865

Eco-friendly means of

transport U31 05942 01702 1702

Joint distribution U32 04058 01163 1163

Social

environmentA4 00863

Cost on amount of CO2

emission U41 03698 00319 319

CO2 emissions reduction

policies U42 02273 00196 196

Beautiful environment

construction in inner

harbors U43

04029 00348 348

46

III Case study

In the questionable survey we also got the mark of Green Port measures

evaluation value of many main ports such as Singapore Port Shanghai Port

Hongkong Port Busan Port LALB Port Rotterdam Port and Yocohama Port

The highest mark is 5 and lowest one is 1

Table425 Evaluation value of many main ports

Singapore

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

LALB

Port

Rotterdam

Port

Yocohama

Port

Port facilities 38000 36000 34000 38182 38000 42000 32000

Port rates and

charges 32000 36000 31000 35455 32000 39000 33000

Inland

connection 39000 34545 35000 29091 35000 45000 36000

Social

circumstance 42000 32727 41000 32000 38000 42727 36000

With the Green Port and Port competitiveness indicator weights results these

ports got the final evaluation value

47

Table426 Final evaluation value on main ports Green Port measures and

competitiveness

Rotterdam

Port

Singapore

Port

LALB

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

Yocohama

Port

394 345 330 330 319 318 317

43 Results Analysis

From the results table we can obtain the many results as following

① The main Green Port measures which are more important to improve port

competitiveness are Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system the indicator weights are 01702 01506 and

01371 among the 11 indicators

② In the Green Port construction Cost on amount of CO2 emission and CO2

emissions reduction policies are the restrictions indicators but the weight

of two indicators are not big 00319 and 00196 So effect on Green Port

construction to port competitiveness does have the weaken capacity but

not clearly strengthen more clearly Thus Green Port construction really

could improve the port competitiveness

48

③ In the case study traditional ports Rotterdam and Singapore Port give us

better examples on Green Port construction especially Rotterdam Port

④ Hongkong Busan and Yocohama Port all got a lower evaluation value

But in detail Hongkong and Yocohama Port got a lower on the port

facilities and rates and charges Busan Port got a higher on the port

facilities and rates and charges but a lower on the inland connection and

social circumstance

⑤ Shanghai Port doesnrsquot have Particular strength factors but the

comprehensive strength is not bad the same as LALB Port

49

Chapter 5 Conclusion

In this thesis the effects of Green Port construction for improving the port

competitiveness have been studied Under the definition of Green Port the

characteristics of Green Port and its effects has been shown by analysing the AHP

method which based on the questionary survey for Green Port specialists and port

officers

Follow the results of analysis on Green Port competitiveness AHP model

Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green ship certification system is

better for Green Port Construction welcome for shipping companies and citizens

who live around the port And in the analysis of Port competitiveness factors port

rates and charges always affects port competitiveness a lot As a trend inland

connection factor abstracts more attention of shipping companies

50

On the trend of port department each port should take a activity to adjust

strategy for improving its competitiveness Such as in the main ports evaluation

Busan port get a high value on port rates and charges and port facilities but as a

lower value on inland connection factor the final value is not as well as we look

forward In the evaluation of Singapore Port through it gets a lower value on rates

and charges higher value on inland connection and social circumstance causes the

final value are better So the Green Port Construction may be a trend in port

department

In the results of this thesis Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system are better solutions for Green Port Construction And

especially it can be verified that the port rates and charges always affects port

competitiveness Futhermore the investment for Green Port construction and its

effects have to be verified in the future

51

References

1 Hoyle B S and Smith J 1992 Transport and Development In Modern

transport geography edited by B S Hoyle R D Knowles (London Belhaven

Press)pp11-31

2 Beresford A K C De Souza A J R G and Pettit S J 2005 Stategic

development of liner shipping companies and terminal operators Ocean yearbook

19(Chicago 1L The University of Chicago Press) pp 732-750

3 Heaver T D 2002 Supply chain and logistics management implications for

liner shipping In The handbook of maritime economics and business edited by C

Grammenos (LondonLLP) pp 375-396

4 Park T E (2011) A Study on selection criteria of Green Port and evaluation of

major Korean port A masters thesis of graduate school of Incheon university

52

5 JeongBH (2009)Green port management policy directions in the green

growth era- The case of Gwangyang port in Republic of Korea Journal of Korea

Port Economic Association Vol25(3) p361-384

6 Lee J S Han N H(2009) A study on Green Port Revitalization According to

Air Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

7 Lee Y K Nan J W(2010)Green Logistics Policy Analysis and Implications

of Japan

8 Lee B S (2010)Tendency and Countermeasures on Green Logistics in Port

Logistics Company A masters thesis of graduate school of Korean Maritime

university

9 Lee J S (2009) A Study on Green Port Revitalization According to Air

Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

10 Zhang F Y Li Z Lu X J Yao X L(2008)Competitiveness of Inland

Ports Based on F-AHP

11 Port of Long Beach (2009) Green Port Policy wwwpolbcom

12 The port of Los Angeles wwwportoflosangelesorg

VIII

AHP 분석을 통하여 그린포트 구축 활동간의 우선순위를 도출하며 구축결과가

항만의 경쟁력에 어떠한 영향을 미칠 것인지를 고찰한다

IX

List of Figures

Figure 11 Research Process 4

Figure 21 Green Port appearance and basic definition 10

Figure 41 Green Port Competitiveness AHP model 38

X

List of Tables

Table 211 Objective of CO2 reduces in main countries 8

Table 221 4kinds Green Port construction promote directions 11

Table 231 Details of LALB Port Green Port Promotion Programs 13

Table 232 Short term and Long term Green Port Plans in Auckland Port 16

Table 233 Summary of the Main Port of Green Port Measures 21

Table 241 Green Port measures in port each department 23

Table 311 Prevention literature research results 27

Table 312 Literature research in Korean academia 28

Table 321 Main factor in the Pretentious Research 31

Table 421 Details of Level I and Level II values 40

Table 422 Comparison matrix of level I indicators 41

Table 423 Average random consistency indicator RI 42

Table 424 Indicator weights table of indicator system 45

Table 425 Evaluation value of many main ports 46

Table 426 Final evaluation value on main ports Green Port measures and

competitiveness 47

XI

CONTENT

Abstract V

List of Figures IX

List of Tables X

Chapter 1 Introduction 1

11 Research background and objective 1

12 Scope and structure of research 3

Chapter 2 Green Port Construction Situation 6

21 Green Port Construction Background 6

22 The Definition of Green Port 9

23 Green Port Construction Situation in major countries 12

24 Green Port Indicators Research 22

Chapter 3 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green Port

Construction 24

31 Port Competitiveness Literature Review 24

32 Port Competitiveness Development Tree 30

33 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green Port

Construction 32

Chapter 4 The Green Port Competitiveness Analysis 36

41 The Green Port Competitiveness Model by AHP 36

42 Green Port Competitiveness Analysis 38

XII

43 Results Analysis 47

Chapter 5 Conclusion 49

References 51

1

Chapter 1 Introduction

11 Research background and objective

The Kyoto Protocol is an international agreement linked to the United Nations

Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) The major feature of the

Kyoto Protocol is that it sets binding targets for 37 industrialized countries and the

European community for reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to fight

global warming These amounts will be lower an average of five per cent based on

1990 levels over the five-year period 2008-2012 The protocol was initially

adopted on 11 December 1997 in Japan but entered into force on 16 February

2005 As of July 2010 191 countries and states have signed and ratified the

protocol

2

After ltKyoto Protocolgt has brought out in 1997 more and more people put

their attention on environment pollution Rapid development in industry

department brings out air water soil noise and wildlife pollution and destruction

As the health development of economic alleviating environmental pollution and

restoring original ecology extremely necessary

Focus on the long-term and future development in the port many counties

government and ports authorities pay attentions on Green Port construction

In the short term C40 World Ports Climate Conference draws up some

adaptive plans among big cities and major ports The plans include the incentives

provided to green ship user cooperation among the C40 member ports

encouragement to develop and utilize the Alternative Maritime Power and so on

In EU Green Port major policies is prohibition the ship utilization on fuel

which sulfur content over 2 (after Jun2010 the limitation of sulfur content is

1) There are also Marco Polo I and Marco Polo II plans in EU In Marco Polo I

Modal Shift Action Catalyst Action and Common Learning Action are included

from 2003 to 2006 And after 2007 in Marco II Motorways of the Sea Action

Traffic Avoidance Actions and Rail Synergy are added

In US people pay more attention to developing the new technology for

reducing CO2 emission Such as power generator and renewable resources and

Northwest Ports Clean Air Strategy

3

Compared with other departments green policy in port department is explained

as green maritime and green shipping For example super-eco ship building and

Modal Shift promotion

The same aim to Hong Kong Ports AMP E-RTG hybrid truck bio-diesel

recycling energy CNG LNG and development are in utilization

ldquoGreen Growth Policyrdquo is the measure which brought out by the Korean

government Follow this strategy Korean port authority also takes out the ldquoGreen

Port building comprehensive planrdquo Furthermore low carbon self-sufficiency port

the disaster safety port eco-friendly port and resource recycling port are the

understandings on the Korean ldquoGreen Growth Policyrdquo

As the port support policies being changed port competitiveness factors are

changed Especially the importance degree of each factor has been changed a

lot The purpose of this study is explaining the competitiveness effects changed

which taking Green Port measures and programs port and give a better advice and

suggestion to Green Port construction

12 Scope and structure of research

The method to analysis the effects of Green Port construction for improving

port competitiveness is AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process)

4

And research process in this study is shown in ltFigure 1gt

ltFigure 1gt Research process

In chapter 1 research background and objective research method and process

are included And chapter 2 introduces the Green Port construction background

definition the Green Port construction situation in many countries and each

department introduction in Green Port construction The chapter 3 views the

literature on port competitiveness and obtains the influence factors used in this

study trend and relationship between port competitiveness The chapter 4 based

5

on the survey data and calculates each indicator importance degree by AHP

method and analysis the result Finally in chapter 5 the conclusion summary the

whole study by the result analysis

6

Chapter 2 Green Port Construction Situation

21 Green Port Construction Background

As the United Nations Secretary General has said the greatest challenge which

we are facing is environmental regulators It is a growing crisis with economic

health and safety food production security and other dimensions

The Kyoto Protocol is an international agreement linked to the United Nations

Framework Convention on Climate Change The major feature of the Kyoto

Protocol is that it sets binding targets for 37 industrialized countries and the

European community for reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to fight

global warming These amount to an average of five percent bellow 1990 level

over the five-year period 2008-2012

The protocol was initially adopted on 11 December 1997 in Japan but all of the

member countries entered into force on16 February 2005 The Kyoto Protocol

7

was adopted in Kyoto Japan on 11 December 1997 and entered into force on 16

February 2005 The detailed rules for the implementation of the Protocol were

adopted at COP 7 in Marrakesh in 2001 and are called the ldquoMarrakesh Accordsrdquo

Follow the ltKyoto Protocolgt several flexible mechanisms are allowed Such

as emissions trading the clean development mechanism (CDM) and joint

implementation The mechanisms allow AnnexⅠcounties to meet their GHG

emission limitations by purchasing GHG emission reductions credits from

elsewhere through financial exchanges projects that reduce emissions in

non-Annex Ⅰ countries or Annex Ⅰ countries with excess allowances The

mechanisms help stimulate green investment and help Parties meet their emission

targets in a cost-effective way

Therefore many countries take action on reducing the GHG discharge emission

For example increase the energy utilization efficiency develop the solar power

wind energy tidal energy and other clean energy in their industry The details

about objective of GHG emission reduction in main countries are displayed as the

following ltTable 1gt

8

ltTable 1gt Objective of CO2 reduce in main countries

Bench

mark of

Year

Objective

()

Absolute

quantity

()

Remark

EU 1990 20~30 -20~-30 Norway New Zealand 40 reducing

USA 2005 17 -3 Passed by House of Representatives

Japan 1990 25 -25 On the premise of attention with China

India

Korea 2020

(BAU) 30 mdashmdash

Discharge amount is up to 564million don

in estimation

China 2005 40~50 60~150

(2005) Each GDP

India 2005 20-25 mdashmdash With the developed countries

participation

Russia 1990 25 -25 Be neutral country

Norway 1990 30~40 -30~-40 mdashmdash

New

Zealand 1990 10~20 -10~ -20 mdashmdash

Austria 2000 5~25 -3~-11 mdashmdash

Canada 2003 20 -3 mdashmdash

Mexico 2002 50 mdashmdash With the developed countries

participation

South

Africa

2020

(BAU) 34 mdashmdash

With the developed countries

participation

Brazil 2020

(BAU) 36~39

-20

(2005) mdashmdash

(Korean Maritime Institute 20095)

9

22 The Definition of Green Port

As the global warming affecting in the world climate has been heavily changed

natural disaster frequently occurred natural resources depletion and supply

imbalance cause crisis to reach a high level For the purpose of getting away from

financial crisis and creating the new growth motivity the counties in the world

make more efforts on developing economic

Because of the realization of this global climate and environment crisis Korean

government had brought out the ldquoGreen Growth Policyrdquo And it made the ldquoGreen

Growth Policyrdquo be embodied and law-governed announced ldquoLow Carbon Green

Growth of the Basic Lawrdquo

In order to coordinate with this policy and law build up the ldquoGreen Growthrdquo

everyone make their efforts and reach ldquoGreen Growthrdquo in Korea each department

As a important industry department port authority also take activity to match the

national strategy of ldquoGreen Growthrdquo and draw up the plan on ldquoGreen Portrdquo

construction

However there isnrsquot a clear definition about the Green Port Korean Land

Transport and Maritime Ministry have explained the Green Port as follows Green

house gas Reducing Energy Effciencing Nature-friendly Port The explanation is

very easy to understand but from a professional point of view it not very

10

comprehensive and concrete So we have to understand the concept in the Green

Port Construction measures and programs There are about 4 kind explanation and

promotion programs in the Green Port Respectively the port which based on

green technology and green business creating new growth motive improving

living standards jumping in the ranks of the advanced port

ltFigure 2gt Green Port appearance and basic definition

In the Green Growth National Strategy Policy there are 10 pieces of policy

directions and 50 researches each department should choose the appropriate one

Follow these researches chose by port availability especially Low Carbon

11

Self-sufficiency Port The Disaster Safety Port Eco-friendly Port Resource

Recycling Port and in this study Green Port construction is a plan on

comprehensive and mix of 4kinds of Green Port Construction

Table 221 Four Promotions for Green Port Construction

Promotion Program

(Green Port type) Activities

Low-Carbon

Self-Sufficiency Port

Eco-friendly inland transportation system building

New renewable resources power equipment utilization

AMP LED utilization

The Disaster Safety

Port

Disaster Prevention environment infrastructure building

Disaster prediction and corresponding system utilization

Eco-Friendly Port Beauty the port by green park planting and so on

Provide eco-friendly port building programs

Resource Recycling

Port

Port waste (silt soil) effectively recycling system

Establish resource recycling port paragon

As table1 shown each type of Green Port has a separate emphasis

Eco-friendly inland transportation system which encourages utilizing rail canal

barge clean system reduces the truck application amount AMP means

Alternative Maritime Power supply system replaces with ship power generation

The Green Port construction in most of counties is the low-carbon self-sufficiency

12

port And in their construction maybe add a few other type promote director like

beauty the port by green park planting and so on

However in this study the Green Port concept is a comprehensive plan among

4 types not a specialization system

23 Green Port Construction Situation in major countries

After ltKyoto protocolgt having brought out each department began to take

affords on the reducing the GHG (greenhouse gas) emission In port department

the activities are embodied in the Green Port construction In this study many

major ports in US EU Japan and Korea are chose to explain for research

231 US

① LALB Port

In order to achieve to reduce marine pollutants standby and build clean port

LALB Port standby resource ministry and environment protection ministry

signed a 5year plan on clean standby action cooperation

This promotion business plan set a set of marine pollutants standby emission

limitation on the ship department from the statistics year 2006-2007 to 2010-2011

handling department heavy duty equipment truck department and so on Such as

13

in Green Port Technology construction department measures and programs are

shown in following Table

Table231 the details of LALB Port Green Port Promotion Programs

Promotion Program

Heavy Equipment Truck

Heavy Equipment

Replace and Update Aging Facilities

Substitute Fuels and Clean Fuel Incentives

Budgetary for the Development of Substitute Fuels

Marine Vessels Tugs

Ship Speed Reduction within the Port

Electrical supply of parking in the Berth

Use low-sulfur fuel (supplementary motor)

Handling Equipment

Air Quality Monitoring

Measure ambient air pollution levels in the vicinity of

the Port

Include a number of real-time air quality measurements

On the restrict situation of heavy equipment trucks and others vessels must to

be replaced and rebuilt in order to minimum the emission of NOx And the trucks

which donrsquot reach the regulate standard do not allowed to get in the port These

regulations will help their owner to replace and update trucks and also set up a

replacement plan to 16000 aging trucks make the replace done by 2012 As

foundation repaired the cargo owner must to pay an addition tax about 20ft 35$

40ft 79$

14

In the maritime department the speed reduction incentive took action in

Jan2005 When ship entry into the port boundary speed must be reduced under

20 miles 12kont At the beginning the effect of this plan is very clearly so the

limitation may be raised to 40mile And AMP (Alternative Maritime Power ) is

encouraged to be built and developed as to ship use their engine and get GHG

emission

② New York- New Jersey Port

The New York- New Jersey Port Authority brought out environment policy on

CO2 emission reduction The main concepts as following first reduce PX SOX

3 each year and CO2 5 Second ship must utilize sulfur-low fuel as a

obligation Third AMP is provided Forth modern the unloading and loading

equipment must be built Fifth promote trucks replacement Sixth reform the ship

engine Seventh invent 9 billion dollars in the following 10 years Eighth invent

to all hybrid equipment (325) Ninth install the hybrid truck in AMPT and

NYCT

③ Seattle Port

15

In Seattle Port Air Environment Maritime Improvement plan has been

accepted in 2005 The plan includes first set up Puget Sound Maritime Air

Forum and make one AMP provide services for two tour ships second change

the diesel hybrid equipment into electric utilization Third use bio-diesel and

diesel catalyst and reduce the emission Forth emphasize the standard and plan of

truck minimum the idling time

Seattle Port Tacoma Port and Vancouver made a assignment and promote

ldquoNorthwest Ports Clean Air Strategyrdquo

④ Auckland Port

Auckland Port set up the aging replacement plan in 2008 and invent 20 milion

dollars gas emission should reach the level And cargo transport system in port

hinterland port authority and Air environment management committee make

cooperation and give an incentive to truck which use new clean technology

Table232 Short term and Long term Green Port Plans in Auckland Port

16

17

232 EU

Rotterdam Port

As the biggest Port in EU Rotterdam Port takes more affords in reducing the

CO2 emission Main programs are low carbon footprint AMP and so on The

limitation of CO2 emission reduces down 50 of 1990 by 2025

In July 2008 the authority of Rotterdam port gave international cooperation

with other ports an extra boost by organizing the World Ports Climate Conference

During this conference the authority of Rotterdam discussed possible ways in

which ports and business could reduce air pollution and CO2 emissions The

proposals the authority of Rotterdam was set out in a declaration which was

supported by all 55 port cities attending the conference The conference resulted

in five projects to improve air quality and reduce CO2 emissions The authority of

Rotterdam is behind the project to further elaborate an Environmental Ship Index

The Rotterdam Climate Initiative is a joint venture with the municipality of

Rotterdam DCMR Environmental Protection Agency Rijnmond and Deltalinqs

Common goal is to halve CO2 emissions in the region by 2025 in comparison with

1990 levels In connection with the Rotterdam Climate Initiative the port works

on (together with DCMR and others) creating an infrastructure for the capture

18

transport and storage of CO2 A business case presented in the summer of 2008 is

now being elaborated into a business plan The business case concludes that

Rotterdam can begin in 2015 with the capture transport and underground storage

of five million tons of CO2 per annum This means that the basic infrastructure

will then be in place for further growth in capture and storage to twenty million

tons in 2025

In 2008 a start was made on the development of a sustainability index for

activities relating to the P for Planet (environment) In 2009 it will further expand

the index to cover the P for People and the P for Profit In the first phase of the

sustainability index CO2 footprint sustainable purchasing sustainable building

and sustainable land allocation will be covered

233 Japan

① Tacoma Port

In the Tacoma Port there are some programs on protecting the air water and

soil environment

In the air protection department ldquoNorthwest Ports Clean Air Strategyrdquo

ldquoGreen Gateway for Traderdquo and ldquoTruck Programrdquo had brought out to against air

pollution The concepts include using ultra-low sulfur diesel bio-diesel and other

cleaner-burning fuels in cargo-handling equipment using low-sulfur distillate

19

fuels at berth adding ldquogreen designrdquo environmental features to ships including

diesel-electric motors that save up to 30 percent in fuel and significantly reduce

emissions setting targets to change older less-efficient truck engines installing

anti-idling devices on rail-switching engines as well as partnering on other

innovative technological advance

The Port of Tacomarsquos four dockside rail yards move cargo quickly and

efficiently from container terminals They also reduce the number of trucks on

city streets and highways Each full train that leaves the Port represents 250 to 300

trucks not on our roads reducing roadway congestion and diesel emissions The

lowest emission route to ship cargo from Asia to the US Midwest is through the

Puget Sound according to the results of a study by Herbert Engineering released

in May 2009

And in the land protection program there are successful clean projects open

spaces and future habitat restoration In 2007 the Port purchased about 70 acres

of open space known as Juliarsquos Gulch and Storey Pit located between the

Tideflats and residential Northeast Tacoma Monitor water quality system is in

utilization in the water department in Tacoma Port

② Tokyo Port

In the Tokyo Port Green Port programs are almost similar with Tacoma Port

e-RTGC (Rubber Tired Gantry Crane) the barge between Tokyo and Yocohama

20

which shorten international maritime container cargo transportation land distance

super eco-shipbuilding technology dissemination and promotion green business

certification operation and shippers and logistics companies support cooperation

③ Osaka Port and Hakata Port

AMP electrical power equipment and solar power equipment are in utilization in

Osaka Port E-RTGC and solar power of refrigerated container are in utilization in

the Hakata Port

234 Korea

In Busan Port a set of Green Port took implementation such as LNG truck

E-RTGC equipment utilization eco-friendly transport means conversion (rail

canal barge) and GHG emission reduction obligation Table233

21

ltTable 233gt Summary of the Main Port of Green Port Measures

COUNTRY PORT MEASURES

US

LALB Port

Green flag AMP discharge gas reduction obligation

recommends use of alternative fuels and clean fuel

funding for the development of alternative fuels facilities

by new engine development instead of NOx emissions

green truck program (reduce70-80) low-sulfur fuel

utilization restore and revitalize the Los Cerritos

Wetlands

New York

Port

AMP modernized facilities utilization high speed hybrid

yard

Auckland

Port

Incentives on the new cleaning technology containers

transportation system

Seattle Port

AMP green ship membership Tier 4 level reducing PM

by 1994 level Smart Way program Northwest Ports

Clean Air Strategy

EU Rotterdam

Port

Clean engine (barge) green ship membership carbon

footprint calculation cruise ship which under port

authority change to use low-sulfur fuel low emission

engine development and utilization Green Award AMP

ship recycling incentives

Japan

Tokyo Port

RTGC (Rubber Tired Gantry Crane) apply for the barge

between Tokyo and Yocohama shorten international

maritime container cargo transportation land distance

super eco-shipbuilding technology dissemination and

promotion green business certification operation

shippers and logistics companies support cooperation

Osaka Port AMP electrical power equipment solar power equipment

Hakata Port E-RTGC solar power utilization in refrigerated container

Korea Busan Port

LNG truck E-RTGC eco-friendly transport means

conversion (rail canal barge) GHG emission reduction

obligation

22

24 Green Port Indicators Research

As the previous section list shown Green Port measures and programs are

substantially the same

When a ship entry in the port boundary from voyage many ports give a

incentive on shifting and utilizing sulfur-low fuel and reducing the speed under

20 miles when the ship berth in the port the alternative maritime power are

provided which replace its power generation

Next in the cargo unloading and loading department the same with above

utilization of sulfur-low fuel and electrical equipment are promoted and

eco-driving education to driver is necessary what speed is fuel fully burning and

emission minimum point

In the cargo transport department in other words truck department the

replacement on aging trucks is popular in many ports aging trucks are prohibited

close to port at the same time an incentive or support function are provided on

aging replacement The automated equipments are recommended to utilize in the

Green Port like hybrid yard tractor And a perfect plan on truck running also could

reduce the idling time and against the emission of CO2

The details reference the following Table 241

23

Table241 Green Port measures in port each department

Emission reduction programs

Ship

department

Shipping

in the

port

boundary

Obligation on the utilization of sulfur-low fuel

Reform ship engine and utilize hybrid

Speed reduce in the port entrance(a off-shore fee

incentive)

Off-shore AMP

Shift utilization system of clean fuel

Unloading and loading

department

Obligation on the utilization of sulfur-low fuel

Replace electrical equipment

Eco-driving

Truck department Hybrid yard tractor utilization

Promote aging truck replacement

Minimum the idling time

Others LED light in the Port

Develop renew and recycle resource energy

The Green Port measures in this study are e-RTGC AMP AGV Green Ship

certification system incentives on the new clean technology Green Flag(speed

reduction incentive)eco-friendly transport means conversion joint distribution

the cost on account of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction polities and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

The details and definition on each Green Port measure and the relationship with

Port Competitiveness will be expressed in next chapter

24

Chapter 3 The Relationship between Port

Competitiveness and Green Port Construction

31 Port Competitiveness Literature Review

Although past studies on port selection models have focused on port selection

made by port facilities port services port rates and charge and location

Murphy made a survey between 534 shipping companies and port authorities in

1989 and between 1850 shipping companies and port authorities in 1992

Comparing with other papers Murphys got a survey among more widely

objects In his paper port selection(port competitiveness) was seen to affected by

facilities situation appropriate pilotage max ship entrance probability the

25

capability of handling non-regular cargos whether to provide information of ship

nationality or not and port services level

In French model (1979) there are two factors affecting the port selection (port

competitiveness) endogenous factor and exogenous factor In endogenous factors

there are adequacy and physical plant condition of terminal facilities terminal rate

and charges frequency and geographic coverage of ship and freight services the

capacity of connecting to inland rails or transport net and the services provides for

the shipping or logistics And exogenous factors included the size and economic

capacity of hinterland as a source exports or market for imports national

economic situation trade policy and support established by government the

situation at home and abroad

The same as Frenchs paper in Paters paper in 1990 there are endogenous and

exogenous factors too In endogenous there are the services provides for the

shipping or logistics capacity of terminal facilities situation and condition of

facilities operation strategies established by port authority convenience to utilize

And the political situation at home and abroad social change economic factor

stabilized labor and capital However in 2004 there is a tremendous change in

Peters new paper There are four parts multi-modal process interface transport

modes infrastructure Multi-model Process part includes ship entrance rapid

speed and accuracy shipper and shipping companies reactive operation flexibility

Interface includes labor power information technology and so on And there are

26

ship calls frequency and amount of fleet factors in the transport modes part In the

infrastructure part includes port facility equipments and so on

Port facilities rates and charges services inland situation and social

circumstance factors affect the port selection and competitiveness a lot from the

research until 1992 by Murphy And in Lirn and Pater research 2003-2004 the

new and detail factors are shown to us

We can clearly see the contents in next table

27

Table 311 Prevention literature research results

Influence factors

French

(1979)

Endogenous

port facilities port rate and charges calls frequency port services

port connection with inland

Exogenous

economic size of hinterland national economic situation trade

policy home and abroad situation

Willingale

(1982)

voyage distance economy size entrance to port and route port

facilities max ship entrance probability port operation rates and

charges port authority scale of port

Slack

(1985)

cost of inland transportation port proximity ship demurrage

multi-transport

Peter

(1990)

Endogenous

port facilities condition of facilities operation strategies

convenience to utilize

Exogenous

political situation social change economic factor stabilized labor

and capital

UNCTAD

(1992)

port facilities services location level of financial industry

information communication system social circumstances economic

stability

Murphy

(1992)

facilities situation appropriate pilotage max ship entrance

probability the capability of handling non-regular cargos whether to

provide information of ship nationality or not port services level

Lirn

(2003-2004)

physical and technologic facilities geopolitical location port

operation and management shipping and terminal cost

Peter

(2004)

Multi-modal Process

ship entrance rapid speed and accuracy shipper and shipping

companies reactive operation flexibility

Interface labor and capital

Transport modes ship calls frequency and amount of fleet factors

28

And there are many experts and scholars research for the influence factors to

port selection and competitiveness in Korea The specific content follows table5

Table 312 Literature research in Korean academia

Influence factors

Jeon Il-su (1992) location facilities charges service level (EDI) terminal operation

port authority

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

( 1993 )

location facilities throughput charges service operation

situation

Kim Hak-so

(1993)

export shipping amount of annual cost of each ton of cargo

marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km of

cargo loading time

import marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km

of cargo amount of liner ship

Yeo Gi-tae (1996) location facilities throughput charge service operation situation

Ha Dong-u amp

Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

location facilities service level logistics charges environment of

logistics service

Yeo Gi-tae (1999) location facilities throughput charges service

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

throughput quay length yard area GNP

Kum Jong-su

(2001)

distance between port and cargo site terminal facilities service

the capacity of multi-transport capacity of cargo handling

administrative service rates and charges of inland transport

congestion

Yeo Gi-tae (2002) location throughput facilities service level

Kim Jin-gu (2002) port facilities location cargo amount rates and charges services

29

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005)

voyage degree to attract cargo cargo handling cost amount of

handling cargo connection to inland service reliability location

berth availability quay length feeder network depth

transshipment volumes cargo security profitability

offing degree to attract cargo berth availability cargo handling

cost transshipment volumes

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005)

cargo handling amount port facilities location rates and charges

level of service

Heo Yun-su

(2005)

port facilities rates and charges services marketing geopolitics

location economic and social circumstance

Kim Geun-seop

(2007)

port services facilities cargo handling amount location cost

productivity factor global factor

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) rates and charges services port characteristics

Many experts and scholars make a research on port selection and

competitiveness recently But the factors selection criteria are difference

Nevertheless the main factors are facilities services cost and so on

Therefore port competitiveness factors which chose in this study are port

facilities port services port rates and charges and social circumstance

However the main factors are not the whole factors any more more and more

detail factors and characteristic factors appearance Port selection and

competitiveness factors have changed And the development content is introduced

in next part

30

32 Port Competitiveness Development Tree

As mentioned above port facilities port rates and charges and port location are

the basic factors in the port selection and competitiveness

From the following table we can discover that first one facilities rates and

charges and location are the most important factor in port selection and

competitiveness second one the importance of social circumstance turns larger

inland connection is necessary all the time

Table 321 Main factor in the Pretentious Research

31

port facilities rates and

charges

inland

connection

social

circumstance location

French (1979) radic radic radic

Wiliingale (1982) radic radic

Slack (1985) radic

Pater (1990) radic radic

UNCTAD (1992) radic radic radic

Murphy(1992) radic

Jeon Il-su (1992) radic radic radic

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

(1993)

radic radic radic

Kim Hak-so

(1993) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1996) radic radic radic

Ha Dong-u

amp Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1998) radic radic radic

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

radic

Kum Jong-su

(2001) radic radic radic radic

Kim Jin-gu(2002) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(2002) radic radic

Lirn(2003-2004) radic radic radic

Pater(2004) radic

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005) radic radic radic

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005) radic radic radic

Heo Yun-su

(2005) radic radic radic radic

Kim Geun-seop

(2007) radic radic radic radic

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) radic

32

33 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green

Port Construction

Following the research above Port facilities rates and charges inland

connection and social circumstance are chose in this study port selection and

competitiveness department

e-RTGC Electric rubber tired gantry crane is a mobile gantry crane used for

stacking intermodal containers within the stacking areas of a container terminal

e-RTGC are used at container terminals and container storage yards to straddling

multiple lanes of railroad and container storage or when maximum storage

density in the container stack is desired

AMP is shorted for Alternative Marine Power and Itrsquos a facility which

provides the electric system in the land for ship which entry in the port The

facility can reduce emissions which ship get entrance in the port

AGV is a mobile robot that follows markers or wires in the floor or uses

vision or lasers They are most often used in industrial applications to move

materials around a manufacturing facility or a warehouse Automatic Guided

Vehicle systems work around-the-clock making continuous flow and just-in-time

delivery easier to achieve Application of the automatic guided vehicle has broade

33

ned during the late 20th century and they are no longer restricted to industrial

environments

The e-RTGC AMP and AGV are the new clean facilities and equipments in the

Green Port they donrsquot reduce the efficiency of handling cargo and they also

reduce the CO2 emission account

Green ship certification system if a ship utilizes clean and CO2 emission

reduction technology on the ship building adds equipment and management and

son on certification would be received And the port authority gives some

incentive and preferential treatment among 45 ports Such as a better schedule is

provided for green membership ship priority in handing cargo and discount on

entrance fee

Incentives on the new cleaning technology There are two expressions about

this measure one is that the port authority give a incentive to ship which have a

great utilization on the new cleaning technology and the other one is that

environment provide many incentives to the authority which utilize the new

cleaning technology in the port such as LED street lamp solar power cranes

Green flag The Green Flag incentive program was set up to encourage ships to

slow down in order to improve air quality The Green Flag program provides

approximately $2 million a year in discounts for vessel operators who slow their

ships to 12 knots (22kmh) or less within 20miles (32km) of the harbor

34

According to the Port the Green Flag program reduced air pollution by 600tons in

2007 and is expected to do better in 2008

All of Green ship certification system incentives on the new cleaning

technology and Green Flag are incentives provided for users of port and aimed at

reduce port rates and charges So the 3 measures belong to affect port rates and

charges

Eco-friendly transport means conversion Eco-friendly means of transport are

much accounted of green port for example railway discharge less GHG emission

than truck barge with a clean engine among the river and inshore canal

Joint distribution joint distribution is a collaborative system which port

provides among many logistics companies It can make the cargo handling speed

rapidly and reduce cargo storage time for CO2 emission reducing such as

refrigerated container In an addition it also makes the logistics companies

transport more efficient

Cost on amount of CO2 emission differenced from other port the cost on

amount of CO2 is included in the port cost The cost aims to reduce the CO2

emission directly

CO2 emission reduction policies compared with other traditional port Green

Port gives more cost discount and incentives but in an addition there are many

policies on CO2 emission restriction Such as aging trucks restrictions in inland

transport department ship entry speed reduced and fuel changed in the ship

35

department and so on Whether these restriction policies constrain port

development or not and the degree of these policies constrain port development

will be explain by the AHP results

Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors some ports in the

western countries are opened as a travel place for visitors so as to change the

polluted impress and raise the position in our heart

Cost on amount of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction policies and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors can affect the social

circumstance factor Whether these measures can or not improve the social

circumstance and port competitiveness we have to see the next calculation and

results

36

Chapter 4 The Green Port Competitiveness

Analysis

41 The Green Port Competitiveness Model by AHP

The AHP is one multi-criteria decision making method which has been

extensively applied to a variety of decision-making situations The multi-criteria

techniques are considered to be a promising framework for evaluation of

decision-making factors since they have the potential to take into account

conflicting multidimensional incommensurable and uncertain effects of

decisions explicitly

In order to apply the AHP method a hierarchical decision schema was

constructed by decomposing the decision problem into its decision elements

37

After that the importance or preferences of the decision elements are examined in

a pair-wise comparison to the elements in the hierarchy The parameters are

estimated using pair-wise comparisons between the importance of the attribute or

decision element in the function using data made by each responder Making

comparisons is a question of which of the two attributes is more import as well as

how much more important

Follow these theories the Green Port Competitiveness Model choose factors as

follow in port competitiveness factors part there are port facilities port rates and

charges inland connection social circumstance in Green Port construction part

there are e-RTGC AMP AGV green ship certification system green flag

incentives on the new cleaning technology eco-friendly transport means

conversion joint distribution CO2 emission reduction policies cost on amount of

CO2 emission beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

38

Figure 41 Green Port Competitiveness AHP model

Follow the Green Port Competitiveness AHP as shown we set a questionnaire

survey to many experts scholars working in logistics system area And we got 15

ones and 14 ones results are believable and integrated

42 Green Port Competitiveness Analysis

39

The key to construction of the factors which affects the port competitiveness

is to determine the conceptual model The selection of the factors directly affects

the evaluation of the result In order to ensure the accuracy objectivity and

practicality of evaluation results the following basic principles must be followed

when selecting factors systematic principles the principle of universal

comparability practical principle and goal-oriented principle In view of the

foregoing the competitiveness which affected by Green Port construction model

is made The analysis follows established principles of port competitiveness

evaluation taking into account the characteristics and functions of the port as well

as port facilities port services port rates and charges ship entrance inland

connection social circumstances and so on

(1) Port facilities

e-RTGC U11 AMP U12 AGV U13

(2) Port rates and charges

Green ship certification system U21 Incentives on the new clean

technology U22 Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

(3) Inland connection

Eco-friendly means of transport U31 Joint distribution U32

(4) Social circumstances

40

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41 CO2 emission reduction policies

U42 Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors U43

Table 421 Details of Level I and Level II values

Level I

indicators Symbol Level II indicators Symbol

Port facilities A1

e-RTGC U11

AMP U12

AGV U13

Port rates and

charges A2

Green ship certification system U21

Incentives on the new clean technology U22

Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

Inland

connection A3

Eco-friendly means of transport U31

Joint distribution U32

Social

circumstances A4

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41

CO2 emissions reduction policies U42

Beautiful environment construction in inner

harbors U43

41

I Determination of level I indicator weights

As the ports competitiveness evaluation indicators at this level are complex

and the elements are not easily quantified AHP is adopted to determine the

indicator weights with the basic steps as follows

(1) Establish a comparative judgment matrix The comparative judgment

matrix is obtained through comparing contributed proportion of multiple

indicators to the overall target by the judgment scale wherein the fuzzy

judgment number introduced is 1 3 5 7 and 9 and the reciprocal of

such number indicates the important degree of one element relatively to

another The results are shown in next table

Table 422 Comparison matrix of level I indicators

A1 A2 A3 A4

A1 1 15 13 3

A2 5 1 3 7

A3 3 13 1 5

A4 13 17 15 1

(2) Calculate the characteristic vector of the comparative judgment matrix

which refers to the weighted vector of the indicator The writer adopts

42

the geometric method to calculate the characteristic vector The

calculated result is as follows

ω=(012 0560 026 006)T λmax=418 It can be obtained from the table

RI=09 Wherein ω is the characteristic vector corresponding to the

maximum characteristic value λmax of the comparative judgment matrix

namely the weighted vector of the indicator RI is the average

consistency indicator as shown in following table

Table423 Average random consistency indicator RI

Matrix Order

RI

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

0 0 058 09 112 124 132 141

Matrix Order

RI

9 10 11 12 13 14 15

145 149 152 154 156 158 159

(3) Conduct consistency check on the comparative judgment matrix Adopt

the random consistency proportion CR to judge the consistency of the

comparative judgment matrix According to CI= (λmax -n)(n-1) and

CR=CIRI it can be obtained through calculation CR=007lt01 Thus

this comparative judgment matrix has a satisfactory consistency and the

indicator weight coefficient calculated through this matrix is acceptable

43

II Determination of level II indicator weights

The data at this level are the details of level Ⅰ indicator The judgment

matrix obtained through comparing multiple sub-indicators under Level Ⅰ

indicators is adopted to determine the weights of sub-indicators under each

indicator one by one The specific steps are as follows

(1) The experts score the weights within the given range To determine the

weights of several small indicators under the same big indicator it is

supposed that the score of small indicator ｋ under the indicator j made

by the expert i is Xijk wherein i=12n n is the total number of

experts ј=12m m is the total number of LevelⅡ indicator к

=12Oj Oj is the number of small indicators under the big indicator ј

іјк IJK LRC l I j k

(2) The credit rating of the expert і is l l =1 2 3 l =1 indicates this expert

is quite familiar with the evaluated contents l =2 indicator this expert is

44

with the evaluated contents l =3 indicates this expert is not quite familiar

with the evaluated contents yi1 is the=08 yi2 =05 and yi3=1

(3) The comprehensive evaluation score of small indicator l under the

indicator j is as follows

(4) The formula for normalization processing of indicator weights is as

follows and the absolute weight of the indicator set is marked as

q=(q1q2q11)

(5) Because of the same justification and principle we donrsquot give the detail

about the calculation The same with the level Ⅰ calculation we

manipulation data one by one and get 14 results And obtain the average

45

results by weighted average method The results detail as Table for the

final weights of Level-Ⅱ evaluation indicators

Above the calculation process and method are just one of data from the

questionable surveys In this study the final results are got from the

weighted average by the results of each questionable survey

The final results are shown as Table424

Table424 Indicator weights table of indicator system

Level I

indicators Weight LevelⅡ indicators

Relative

weight

Absolute

weight

Importance

percentage

Port Facilities

A1 02735

e-RTGC U11 05506 01506 1506

AMP U12 01648 00451 451

AGV U13 02826 00773 773

Port Rates and

Charges A2

02902

Green ship certification s

ystem U21 04724 01371 1371

Incentives on the new

clean technology U22 02871 00833 833

Green Flag (speed

reduction incentive)U23 02405 00698 698

Inland

connection A3

02865

Eco-friendly means of

transport U31 05942 01702 1702

Joint distribution U32 04058 01163 1163

Social

environmentA4 00863

Cost on amount of CO2

emission U41 03698 00319 319

CO2 emissions reduction

policies U42 02273 00196 196

Beautiful environment

construction in inner

harbors U43

04029 00348 348

46

III Case study

In the questionable survey we also got the mark of Green Port measures

evaluation value of many main ports such as Singapore Port Shanghai Port

Hongkong Port Busan Port LALB Port Rotterdam Port and Yocohama Port

The highest mark is 5 and lowest one is 1

Table425 Evaluation value of many main ports

Singapore

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

LALB

Port

Rotterdam

Port

Yocohama

Port

Port facilities 38000 36000 34000 38182 38000 42000 32000

Port rates and

charges 32000 36000 31000 35455 32000 39000 33000

Inland

connection 39000 34545 35000 29091 35000 45000 36000

Social

circumstance 42000 32727 41000 32000 38000 42727 36000

With the Green Port and Port competitiveness indicator weights results these

ports got the final evaluation value

47

Table426 Final evaluation value on main ports Green Port measures and

competitiveness

Rotterdam

Port

Singapore

Port

LALB

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

Yocohama

Port

394 345 330 330 319 318 317

43 Results Analysis

From the results table we can obtain the many results as following

① The main Green Port measures which are more important to improve port

competitiveness are Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system the indicator weights are 01702 01506 and

01371 among the 11 indicators

② In the Green Port construction Cost on amount of CO2 emission and CO2

emissions reduction policies are the restrictions indicators but the weight

of two indicators are not big 00319 and 00196 So effect on Green Port

construction to port competitiveness does have the weaken capacity but

not clearly strengthen more clearly Thus Green Port construction really

could improve the port competitiveness

48

③ In the case study traditional ports Rotterdam and Singapore Port give us

better examples on Green Port construction especially Rotterdam Port

④ Hongkong Busan and Yocohama Port all got a lower evaluation value

But in detail Hongkong and Yocohama Port got a lower on the port

facilities and rates and charges Busan Port got a higher on the port

facilities and rates and charges but a lower on the inland connection and

social circumstance

⑤ Shanghai Port doesnrsquot have Particular strength factors but the

comprehensive strength is not bad the same as LALB Port

49

Chapter 5 Conclusion

In this thesis the effects of Green Port construction for improving the port

competitiveness have been studied Under the definition of Green Port the

characteristics of Green Port and its effects has been shown by analysing the AHP

method which based on the questionary survey for Green Port specialists and port

officers

Follow the results of analysis on Green Port competitiveness AHP model

Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green ship certification system is

better for Green Port Construction welcome for shipping companies and citizens

who live around the port And in the analysis of Port competitiveness factors port

rates and charges always affects port competitiveness a lot As a trend inland

connection factor abstracts more attention of shipping companies

50

On the trend of port department each port should take a activity to adjust

strategy for improving its competitiveness Such as in the main ports evaluation

Busan port get a high value on port rates and charges and port facilities but as a

lower value on inland connection factor the final value is not as well as we look

forward In the evaluation of Singapore Port through it gets a lower value on rates

and charges higher value on inland connection and social circumstance causes the

final value are better So the Green Port Construction may be a trend in port

department

In the results of this thesis Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system are better solutions for Green Port Construction And

especially it can be verified that the port rates and charges always affects port

competitiveness Futhermore the investment for Green Port construction and its

effects have to be verified in the future

51

References

1 Hoyle B S and Smith J 1992 Transport and Development In Modern

transport geography edited by B S Hoyle R D Knowles (London Belhaven

Press)pp11-31

2 Beresford A K C De Souza A J R G and Pettit S J 2005 Stategic

development of liner shipping companies and terminal operators Ocean yearbook

19(Chicago 1L The University of Chicago Press) pp 732-750

3 Heaver T D 2002 Supply chain and logistics management implications for

liner shipping In The handbook of maritime economics and business edited by C

Grammenos (LondonLLP) pp 375-396

4 Park T E (2011) A Study on selection criteria of Green Port and evaluation of

major Korean port A masters thesis of graduate school of Incheon university

52

5 JeongBH (2009)Green port management policy directions in the green

growth era- The case of Gwangyang port in Republic of Korea Journal of Korea

Port Economic Association Vol25(3) p361-384

6 Lee J S Han N H(2009) A study on Green Port Revitalization According to

Air Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

7 Lee Y K Nan J W(2010)Green Logistics Policy Analysis and Implications

of Japan

8 Lee B S (2010)Tendency and Countermeasures on Green Logistics in Port

Logistics Company A masters thesis of graduate school of Korean Maritime

university

9 Lee J S (2009) A Study on Green Port Revitalization According to Air

Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

10 Zhang F Y Li Z Lu X J Yao X L(2008)Competitiveness of Inland

Ports Based on F-AHP

11 Port of Long Beach (2009) Green Port Policy wwwpolbcom

12 The port of Los Angeles wwwportoflosangelesorg

IX

List of Figures

Figure 11 Research Process 4

Figure 21 Green Port appearance and basic definition 10

Figure 41 Green Port Competitiveness AHP model 38

X

List of Tables

Table 211 Objective of CO2 reduces in main countries 8

Table 221 4kinds Green Port construction promote directions 11

Table 231 Details of LALB Port Green Port Promotion Programs 13

Table 232 Short term and Long term Green Port Plans in Auckland Port 16

Table 233 Summary of the Main Port of Green Port Measures 21

Table 241 Green Port measures in port each department 23

Table 311 Prevention literature research results 27

Table 312 Literature research in Korean academia 28

Table 321 Main factor in the Pretentious Research 31

Table 421 Details of Level I and Level II values 40

Table 422 Comparison matrix of level I indicators 41

Table 423 Average random consistency indicator RI 42

Table 424 Indicator weights table of indicator system 45

Table 425 Evaluation value of many main ports 46

Table 426 Final evaluation value on main ports Green Port measures and

competitiveness 47

XI

CONTENT

Abstract V

List of Figures IX

List of Tables X

Chapter 1 Introduction 1

11 Research background and objective 1

12 Scope and structure of research 3

Chapter 2 Green Port Construction Situation 6

21 Green Port Construction Background 6

22 The Definition of Green Port 9

23 Green Port Construction Situation in major countries 12

24 Green Port Indicators Research 22

Chapter 3 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green Port

Construction 24

31 Port Competitiveness Literature Review 24

32 Port Competitiveness Development Tree 30

33 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green Port

Construction 32

Chapter 4 The Green Port Competitiveness Analysis 36

41 The Green Port Competitiveness Model by AHP 36

42 Green Port Competitiveness Analysis 38

XII

43 Results Analysis 47

Chapter 5 Conclusion 49

References 51

1

Chapter 1 Introduction

11 Research background and objective

The Kyoto Protocol is an international agreement linked to the United Nations

Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) The major feature of the

Kyoto Protocol is that it sets binding targets for 37 industrialized countries and the

European community for reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to fight

global warming These amounts will be lower an average of five per cent based on

1990 levels over the five-year period 2008-2012 The protocol was initially

adopted on 11 December 1997 in Japan but entered into force on 16 February

2005 As of July 2010 191 countries and states have signed and ratified the

protocol

2

After ltKyoto Protocolgt has brought out in 1997 more and more people put

their attention on environment pollution Rapid development in industry

department brings out air water soil noise and wildlife pollution and destruction

As the health development of economic alleviating environmental pollution and

restoring original ecology extremely necessary

Focus on the long-term and future development in the port many counties

government and ports authorities pay attentions on Green Port construction

In the short term C40 World Ports Climate Conference draws up some

adaptive plans among big cities and major ports The plans include the incentives

provided to green ship user cooperation among the C40 member ports

encouragement to develop and utilize the Alternative Maritime Power and so on

In EU Green Port major policies is prohibition the ship utilization on fuel

which sulfur content over 2 (after Jun2010 the limitation of sulfur content is

1) There are also Marco Polo I and Marco Polo II plans in EU In Marco Polo I

Modal Shift Action Catalyst Action and Common Learning Action are included

from 2003 to 2006 And after 2007 in Marco II Motorways of the Sea Action

Traffic Avoidance Actions and Rail Synergy are added

In US people pay more attention to developing the new technology for

reducing CO2 emission Such as power generator and renewable resources and

Northwest Ports Clean Air Strategy

3

Compared with other departments green policy in port department is explained

as green maritime and green shipping For example super-eco ship building and

Modal Shift promotion

The same aim to Hong Kong Ports AMP E-RTG hybrid truck bio-diesel

recycling energy CNG LNG and development are in utilization

ldquoGreen Growth Policyrdquo is the measure which brought out by the Korean

government Follow this strategy Korean port authority also takes out the ldquoGreen

Port building comprehensive planrdquo Furthermore low carbon self-sufficiency port

the disaster safety port eco-friendly port and resource recycling port are the

understandings on the Korean ldquoGreen Growth Policyrdquo

As the port support policies being changed port competitiveness factors are

changed Especially the importance degree of each factor has been changed a

lot The purpose of this study is explaining the competitiveness effects changed

which taking Green Port measures and programs port and give a better advice and

suggestion to Green Port construction

12 Scope and structure of research

The method to analysis the effects of Green Port construction for improving

port competitiveness is AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process)

4

And research process in this study is shown in ltFigure 1gt

ltFigure 1gt Research process

In chapter 1 research background and objective research method and process

are included And chapter 2 introduces the Green Port construction background

definition the Green Port construction situation in many countries and each

department introduction in Green Port construction The chapter 3 views the

literature on port competitiveness and obtains the influence factors used in this

study trend and relationship between port competitiveness The chapter 4 based

5

on the survey data and calculates each indicator importance degree by AHP

method and analysis the result Finally in chapter 5 the conclusion summary the

whole study by the result analysis

6

Chapter 2 Green Port Construction Situation

21 Green Port Construction Background

As the United Nations Secretary General has said the greatest challenge which

we are facing is environmental regulators It is a growing crisis with economic

health and safety food production security and other dimensions

The Kyoto Protocol is an international agreement linked to the United Nations

Framework Convention on Climate Change The major feature of the Kyoto

Protocol is that it sets binding targets for 37 industrialized countries and the

European community for reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to fight

global warming These amount to an average of five percent bellow 1990 level

over the five-year period 2008-2012

The protocol was initially adopted on 11 December 1997 in Japan but all of the

member countries entered into force on16 February 2005 The Kyoto Protocol

7

was adopted in Kyoto Japan on 11 December 1997 and entered into force on 16

February 2005 The detailed rules for the implementation of the Protocol were

adopted at COP 7 in Marrakesh in 2001 and are called the ldquoMarrakesh Accordsrdquo

Follow the ltKyoto Protocolgt several flexible mechanisms are allowed Such

as emissions trading the clean development mechanism (CDM) and joint

implementation The mechanisms allow AnnexⅠcounties to meet their GHG

emission limitations by purchasing GHG emission reductions credits from

elsewhere through financial exchanges projects that reduce emissions in

non-Annex Ⅰ countries or Annex Ⅰ countries with excess allowances The

mechanisms help stimulate green investment and help Parties meet their emission

targets in a cost-effective way

Therefore many countries take action on reducing the GHG discharge emission

For example increase the energy utilization efficiency develop the solar power

wind energy tidal energy and other clean energy in their industry The details

about objective of GHG emission reduction in main countries are displayed as the

following ltTable 1gt

8

ltTable 1gt Objective of CO2 reduce in main countries

Bench

mark of

Year

Objective

()

Absolute

quantity

()

Remark

EU 1990 20~30 -20~-30 Norway New Zealand 40 reducing

USA 2005 17 -3 Passed by House of Representatives

Japan 1990 25 -25 On the premise of attention with China

India

Korea 2020

(BAU) 30 mdashmdash

Discharge amount is up to 564million don

in estimation

China 2005 40~50 60~150

(2005) Each GDP

India 2005 20-25 mdashmdash With the developed countries

participation

Russia 1990 25 -25 Be neutral country

Norway 1990 30~40 -30~-40 mdashmdash

New

Zealand 1990 10~20 -10~ -20 mdashmdash

Austria 2000 5~25 -3~-11 mdashmdash

Canada 2003 20 -3 mdashmdash

Mexico 2002 50 mdashmdash With the developed countries

participation

South

Africa

2020

(BAU) 34 mdashmdash

With the developed countries

participation

Brazil 2020

(BAU) 36~39

-20

(2005) mdashmdash

(Korean Maritime Institute 20095)

9

22 The Definition of Green Port

As the global warming affecting in the world climate has been heavily changed

natural disaster frequently occurred natural resources depletion and supply

imbalance cause crisis to reach a high level For the purpose of getting away from

financial crisis and creating the new growth motivity the counties in the world

make more efforts on developing economic

Because of the realization of this global climate and environment crisis Korean

government had brought out the ldquoGreen Growth Policyrdquo And it made the ldquoGreen

Growth Policyrdquo be embodied and law-governed announced ldquoLow Carbon Green

Growth of the Basic Lawrdquo

In order to coordinate with this policy and law build up the ldquoGreen Growthrdquo

everyone make their efforts and reach ldquoGreen Growthrdquo in Korea each department

As a important industry department port authority also take activity to match the

national strategy of ldquoGreen Growthrdquo and draw up the plan on ldquoGreen Portrdquo

construction

However there isnrsquot a clear definition about the Green Port Korean Land

Transport and Maritime Ministry have explained the Green Port as follows Green

house gas Reducing Energy Effciencing Nature-friendly Port The explanation is

very easy to understand but from a professional point of view it not very

10

comprehensive and concrete So we have to understand the concept in the Green

Port Construction measures and programs There are about 4 kind explanation and

promotion programs in the Green Port Respectively the port which based on

green technology and green business creating new growth motive improving

living standards jumping in the ranks of the advanced port

ltFigure 2gt Green Port appearance and basic definition

In the Green Growth National Strategy Policy there are 10 pieces of policy

directions and 50 researches each department should choose the appropriate one

Follow these researches chose by port availability especially Low Carbon

11

Self-sufficiency Port The Disaster Safety Port Eco-friendly Port Resource

Recycling Port and in this study Green Port construction is a plan on

comprehensive and mix of 4kinds of Green Port Construction

Table 221 Four Promotions for Green Port Construction

Promotion Program

(Green Port type) Activities

Low-Carbon

Self-Sufficiency Port

Eco-friendly inland transportation system building

New renewable resources power equipment utilization

AMP LED utilization

The Disaster Safety

Port

Disaster Prevention environment infrastructure building

Disaster prediction and corresponding system utilization

Eco-Friendly Port Beauty the port by green park planting and so on

Provide eco-friendly port building programs

Resource Recycling

Port

Port waste (silt soil) effectively recycling system

Establish resource recycling port paragon

As table1 shown each type of Green Port has a separate emphasis

Eco-friendly inland transportation system which encourages utilizing rail canal

barge clean system reduces the truck application amount AMP means

Alternative Maritime Power supply system replaces with ship power generation

The Green Port construction in most of counties is the low-carbon self-sufficiency

12

port And in their construction maybe add a few other type promote director like

beauty the port by green park planting and so on

However in this study the Green Port concept is a comprehensive plan among

4 types not a specialization system

23 Green Port Construction Situation in major countries

After ltKyoto protocolgt having brought out each department began to take

affords on the reducing the GHG (greenhouse gas) emission In port department

the activities are embodied in the Green Port construction In this study many

major ports in US EU Japan and Korea are chose to explain for research

231 US

① LALB Port

In order to achieve to reduce marine pollutants standby and build clean port

LALB Port standby resource ministry and environment protection ministry

signed a 5year plan on clean standby action cooperation

This promotion business plan set a set of marine pollutants standby emission

limitation on the ship department from the statistics year 2006-2007 to 2010-2011

handling department heavy duty equipment truck department and so on Such as

13

in Green Port Technology construction department measures and programs are

shown in following Table

Table231 the details of LALB Port Green Port Promotion Programs

Promotion Program

Heavy Equipment Truck

Heavy Equipment

Replace and Update Aging Facilities

Substitute Fuels and Clean Fuel Incentives

Budgetary for the Development of Substitute Fuels

Marine Vessels Tugs

Ship Speed Reduction within the Port

Electrical supply of parking in the Berth

Use low-sulfur fuel (supplementary motor)

Handling Equipment

Air Quality Monitoring

Measure ambient air pollution levels in the vicinity of

the Port

Include a number of real-time air quality measurements

On the restrict situation of heavy equipment trucks and others vessels must to

be replaced and rebuilt in order to minimum the emission of NOx And the trucks

which donrsquot reach the regulate standard do not allowed to get in the port These

regulations will help their owner to replace and update trucks and also set up a

replacement plan to 16000 aging trucks make the replace done by 2012 As

foundation repaired the cargo owner must to pay an addition tax about 20ft 35$

40ft 79$

14

In the maritime department the speed reduction incentive took action in

Jan2005 When ship entry into the port boundary speed must be reduced under

20 miles 12kont At the beginning the effect of this plan is very clearly so the

limitation may be raised to 40mile And AMP (Alternative Maritime Power ) is

encouraged to be built and developed as to ship use their engine and get GHG

emission

② New York- New Jersey Port

The New York- New Jersey Port Authority brought out environment policy on

CO2 emission reduction The main concepts as following first reduce PX SOX

3 each year and CO2 5 Second ship must utilize sulfur-low fuel as a

obligation Third AMP is provided Forth modern the unloading and loading

equipment must be built Fifth promote trucks replacement Sixth reform the ship

engine Seventh invent 9 billion dollars in the following 10 years Eighth invent

to all hybrid equipment (325) Ninth install the hybrid truck in AMPT and

NYCT

③ Seattle Port

15

In Seattle Port Air Environment Maritime Improvement plan has been

accepted in 2005 The plan includes first set up Puget Sound Maritime Air

Forum and make one AMP provide services for two tour ships second change

the diesel hybrid equipment into electric utilization Third use bio-diesel and

diesel catalyst and reduce the emission Forth emphasize the standard and plan of

truck minimum the idling time

Seattle Port Tacoma Port and Vancouver made a assignment and promote

ldquoNorthwest Ports Clean Air Strategyrdquo

④ Auckland Port

Auckland Port set up the aging replacement plan in 2008 and invent 20 milion

dollars gas emission should reach the level And cargo transport system in port

hinterland port authority and Air environment management committee make

cooperation and give an incentive to truck which use new clean technology

Table232 Short term and Long term Green Port Plans in Auckland Port

16

17

232 EU

Rotterdam Port

As the biggest Port in EU Rotterdam Port takes more affords in reducing the

CO2 emission Main programs are low carbon footprint AMP and so on The

limitation of CO2 emission reduces down 50 of 1990 by 2025

In July 2008 the authority of Rotterdam port gave international cooperation

with other ports an extra boost by organizing the World Ports Climate Conference

During this conference the authority of Rotterdam discussed possible ways in

which ports and business could reduce air pollution and CO2 emissions The

proposals the authority of Rotterdam was set out in a declaration which was

supported by all 55 port cities attending the conference The conference resulted

in five projects to improve air quality and reduce CO2 emissions The authority of

Rotterdam is behind the project to further elaborate an Environmental Ship Index

The Rotterdam Climate Initiative is a joint venture with the municipality of

Rotterdam DCMR Environmental Protection Agency Rijnmond and Deltalinqs

Common goal is to halve CO2 emissions in the region by 2025 in comparison with

1990 levels In connection with the Rotterdam Climate Initiative the port works

on (together with DCMR and others) creating an infrastructure for the capture

18

transport and storage of CO2 A business case presented in the summer of 2008 is

now being elaborated into a business plan The business case concludes that

Rotterdam can begin in 2015 with the capture transport and underground storage

of five million tons of CO2 per annum This means that the basic infrastructure

will then be in place for further growth in capture and storage to twenty million

tons in 2025

In 2008 a start was made on the development of a sustainability index for

activities relating to the P for Planet (environment) In 2009 it will further expand

the index to cover the P for People and the P for Profit In the first phase of the

sustainability index CO2 footprint sustainable purchasing sustainable building

and sustainable land allocation will be covered

233 Japan

① Tacoma Port

In the Tacoma Port there are some programs on protecting the air water and

soil environment

In the air protection department ldquoNorthwest Ports Clean Air Strategyrdquo

ldquoGreen Gateway for Traderdquo and ldquoTruck Programrdquo had brought out to against air

pollution The concepts include using ultra-low sulfur diesel bio-diesel and other

cleaner-burning fuels in cargo-handling equipment using low-sulfur distillate

19

fuels at berth adding ldquogreen designrdquo environmental features to ships including

diesel-electric motors that save up to 30 percent in fuel and significantly reduce

emissions setting targets to change older less-efficient truck engines installing

anti-idling devices on rail-switching engines as well as partnering on other

innovative technological advance

The Port of Tacomarsquos four dockside rail yards move cargo quickly and

efficiently from container terminals They also reduce the number of trucks on

city streets and highways Each full train that leaves the Port represents 250 to 300

trucks not on our roads reducing roadway congestion and diesel emissions The

lowest emission route to ship cargo from Asia to the US Midwest is through the

Puget Sound according to the results of a study by Herbert Engineering released

in May 2009

And in the land protection program there are successful clean projects open

spaces and future habitat restoration In 2007 the Port purchased about 70 acres

of open space known as Juliarsquos Gulch and Storey Pit located between the

Tideflats and residential Northeast Tacoma Monitor water quality system is in

utilization in the water department in Tacoma Port

② Tokyo Port

In the Tokyo Port Green Port programs are almost similar with Tacoma Port

e-RTGC (Rubber Tired Gantry Crane) the barge between Tokyo and Yocohama

20

which shorten international maritime container cargo transportation land distance

super eco-shipbuilding technology dissemination and promotion green business

certification operation and shippers and logistics companies support cooperation

③ Osaka Port and Hakata Port

AMP electrical power equipment and solar power equipment are in utilization in

Osaka Port E-RTGC and solar power of refrigerated container are in utilization in

the Hakata Port

234 Korea

In Busan Port a set of Green Port took implementation such as LNG truck

E-RTGC equipment utilization eco-friendly transport means conversion (rail

canal barge) and GHG emission reduction obligation Table233

21

ltTable 233gt Summary of the Main Port of Green Port Measures

COUNTRY PORT MEASURES

US

LALB Port

Green flag AMP discharge gas reduction obligation

recommends use of alternative fuels and clean fuel

funding for the development of alternative fuels facilities

by new engine development instead of NOx emissions

green truck program (reduce70-80) low-sulfur fuel

utilization restore and revitalize the Los Cerritos

Wetlands

New York

Port

AMP modernized facilities utilization high speed hybrid

yard

Auckland

Port

Incentives on the new cleaning technology containers

transportation system

Seattle Port

AMP green ship membership Tier 4 level reducing PM

by 1994 level Smart Way program Northwest Ports

Clean Air Strategy

EU Rotterdam

Port

Clean engine (barge) green ship membership carbon

footprint calculation cruise ship which under port

authority change to use low-sulfur fuel low emission

engine development and utilization Green Award AMP

ship recycling incentives

Japan

Tokyo Port

RTGC (Rubber Tired Gantry Crane) apply for the barge

between Tokyo and Yocohama shorten international

maritime container cargo transportation land distance

super eco-shipbuilding technology dissemination and

promotion green business certification operation

shippers and logistics companies support cooperation

Osaka Port AMP electrical power equipment solar power equipment

Hakata Port E-RTGC solar power utilization in refrigerated container

Korea Busan Port

LNG truck E-RTGC eco-friendly transport means

conversion (rail canal barge) GHG emission reduction

obligation

22

24 Green Port Indicators Research

As the previous section list shown Green Port measures and programs are

substantially the same

When a ship entry in the port boundary from voyage many ports give a

incentive on shifting and utilizing sulfur-low fuel and reducing the speed under

20 miles when the ship berth in the port the alternative maritime power are

provided which replace its power generation

Next in the cargo unloading and loading department the same with above

utilization of sulfur-low fuel and electrical equipment are promoted and

eco-driving education to driver is necessary what speed is fuel fully burning and

emission minimum point

In the cargo transport department in other words truck department the

replacement on aging trucks is popular in many ports aging trucks are prohibited

close to port at the same time an incentive or support function are provided on

aging replacement The automated equipments are recommended to utilize in the

Green Port like hybrid yard tractor And a perfect plan on truck running also could

reduce the idling time and against the emission of CO2

The details reference the following Table 241

23

Table241 Green Port measures in port each department

Emission reduction programs

Ship

department

Shipping

in the

port

boundary

Obligation on the utilization of sulfur-low fuel

Reform ship engine and utilize hybrid

Speed reduce in the port entrance(a off-shore fee

incentive)

Off-shore AMP

Shift utilization system of clean fuel

Unloading and loading

department

Obligation on the utilization of sulfur-low fuel

Replace electrical equipment

Eco-driving

Truck department Hybrid yard tractor utilization

Promote aging truck replacement

Minimum the idling time

Others LED light in the Port

Develop renew and recycle resource energy

The Green Port measures in this study are e-RTGC AMP AGV Green Ship

certification system incentives on the new clean technology Green Flag(speed

reduction incentive)eco-friendly transport means conversion joint distribution

the cost on account of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction polities and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

The details and definition on each Green Port measure and the relationship with

Port Competitiveness will be expressed in next chapter

24

Chapter 3 The Relationship between Port

Competitiveness and Green Port Construction

31 Port Competitiveness Literature Review

Although past studies on port selection models have focused on port selection

made by port facilities port services port rates and charge and location

Murphy made a survey between 534 shipping companies and port authorities in

1989 and between 1850 shipping companies and port authorities in 1992

Comparing with other papers Murphys got a survey among more widely

objects In his paper port selection(port competitiveness) was seen to affected by

facilities situation appropriate pilotage max ship entrance probability the

25

capability of handling non-regular cargos whether to provide information of ship

nationality or not and port services level

In French model (1979) there are two factors affecting the port selection (port

competitiveness) endogenous factor and exogenous factor In endogenous factors

there are adequacy and physical plant condition of terminal facilities terminal rate

and charges frequency and geographic coverage of ship and freight services the

capacity of connecting to inland rails or transport net and the services provides for

the shipping or logistics And exogenous factors included the size and economic

capacity of hinterland as a source exports or market for imports national

economic situation trade policy and support established by government the

situation at home and abroad

The same as Frenchs paper in Paters paper in 1990 there are endogenous and

exogenous factors too In endogenous there are the services provides for the

shipping or logistics capacity of terminal facilities situation and condition of

facilities operation strategies established by port authority convenience to utilize

And the political situation at home and abroad social change economic factor

stabilized labor and capital However in 2004 there is a tremendous change in

Peters new paper There are four parts multi-modal process interface transport

modes infrastructure Multi-model Process part includes ship entrance rapid

speed and accuracy shipper and shipping companies reactive operation flexibility

Interface includes labor power information technology and so on And there are

26

ship calls frequency and amount of fleet factors in the transport modes part In the

infrastructure part includes port facility equipments and so on

Port facilities rates and charges services inland situation and social

circumstance factors affect the port selection and competitiveness a lot from the

research until 1992 by Murphy And in Lirn and Pater research 2003-2004 the

new and detail factors are shown to us

We can clearly see the contents in next table

27

Table 311 Prevention literature research results

Influence factors

French

(1979)

Endogenous

port facilities port rate and charges calls frequency port services

port connection with inland

Exogenous

economic size of hinterland national economic situation trade

policy home and abroad situation

Willingale

(1982)

voyage distance economy size entrance to port and route port

facilities max ship entrance probability port operation rates and

charges port authority scale of port

Slack

(1985)

cost of inland transportation port proximity ship demurrage

multi-transport

Peter

(1990)

Endogenous

port facilities condition of facilities operation strategies

convenience to utilize

Exogenous

political situation social change economic factor stabilized labor

and capital

UNCTAD

(1992)

port facilities services location level of financial industry

information communication system social circumstances economic

stability

Murphy

(1992)

facilities situation appropriate pilotage max ship entrance

probability the capability of handling non-regular cargos whether to

provide information of ship nationality or not port services level

Lirn

(2003-2004)

physical and technologic facilities geopolitical location port

operation and management shipping and terminal cost

Peter

(2004)

Multi-modal Process

ship entrance rapid speed and accuracy shipper and shipping

companies reactive operation flexibility

Interface labor and capital

Transport modes ship calls frequency and amount of fleet factors

28

And there are many experts and scholars research for the influence factors to

port selection and competitiveness in Korea The specific content follows table5

Table 312 Literature research in Korean academia

Influence factors

Jeon Il-su (1992) location facilities charges service level (EDI) terminal operation

port authority

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

( 1993 )

location facilities throughput charges service operation

situation

Kim Hak-so

(1993)

export shipping amount of annual cost of each ton of cargo

marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km of

cargo loading time

import marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km

of cargo amount of liner ship

Yeo Gi-tae (1996) location facilities throughput charge service operation situation

Ha Dong-u amp

Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

location facilities service level logistics charges environment of

logistics service

Yeo Gi-tae (1999) location facilities throughput charges service

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

throughput quay length yard area GNP

Kum Jong-su

(2001)

distance between port and cargo site terminal facilities service

the capacity of multi-transport capacity of cargo handling

administrative service rates and charges of inland transport

congestion

Yeo Gi-tae (2002) location throughput facilities service level

Kim Jin-gu (2002) port facilities location cargo amount rates and charges services

29

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005)

voyage degree to attract cargo cargo handling cost amount of

handling cargo connection to inland service reliability location

berth availability quay length feeder network depth

transshipment volumes cargo security profitability

offing degree to attract cargo berth availability cargo handling

cost transshipment volumes

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005)

cargo handling amount port facilities location rates and charges

level of service

Heo Yun-su

(2005)

port facilities rates and charges services marketing geopolitics

location economic and social circumstance

Kim Geun-seop

(2007)

port services facilities cargo handling amount location cost

productivity factor global factor

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) rates and charges services port characteristics

Many experts and scholars make a research on port selection and

competitiveness recently But the factors selection criteria are difference

Nevertheless the main factors are facilities services cost and so on

Therefore port competitiveness factors which chose in this study are port

facilities port services port rates and charges and social circumstance

However the main factors are not the whole factors any more more and more

detail factors and characteristic factors appearance Port selection and

competitiveness factors have changed And the development content is introduced

in next part

30

32 Port Competitiveness Development Tree

As mentioned above port facilities port rates and charges and port location are

the basic factors in the port selection and competitiveness

From the following table we can discover that first one facilities rates and

charges and location are the most important factor in port selection and

competitiveness second one the importance of social circumstance turns larger

inland connection is necessary all the time

Table 321 Main factor in the Pretentious Research

31

port facilities rates and

charges

inland

connection

social

circumstance location

French (1979) radic radic radic

Wiliingale (1982) radic radic

Slack (1985) radic

Pater (1990) radic radic

UNCTAD (1992) radic radic radic

Murphy(1992) radic

Jeon Il-su (1992) radic radic radic

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

(1993)

radic radic radic

Kim Hak-so

(1993) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1996) radic radic radic

Ha Dong-u

amp Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1998) radic radic radic

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

radic

Kum Jong-su

(2001) radic radic radic radic

Kim Jin-gu(2002) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(2002) radic radic

Lirn(2003-2004) radic radic radic

Pater(2004) radic

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005) radic radic radic

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005) radic radic radic

Heo Yun-su

(2005) radic radic radic radic

Kim Geun-seop

(2007) radic radic radic radic

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) radic

32

33 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green

Port Construction

Following the research above Port facilities rates and charges inland

connection and social circumstance are chose in this study port selection and

competitiveness department

e-RTGC Electric rubber tired gantry crane is a mobile gantry crane used for

stacking intermodal containers within the stacking areas of a container terminal

e-RTGC are used at container terminals and container storage yards to straddling

multiple lanes of railroad and container storage or when maximum storage

density in the container stack is desired

AMP is shorted for Alternative Marine Power and Itrsquos a facility which

provides the electric system in the land for ship which entry in the port The

facility can reduce emissions which ship get entrance in the port

AGV is a mobile robot that follows markers or wires in the floor or uses

vision or lasers They are most often used in industrial applications to move

materials around a manufacturing facility or a warehouse Automatic Guided

Vehicle systems work around-the-clock making continuous flow and just-in-time

delivery easier to achieve Application of the automatic guided vehicle has broade

33

ned during the late 20th century and they are no longer restricted to industrial

environments

The e-RTGC AMP and AGV are the new clean facilities and equipments in the

Green Port they donrsquot reduce the efficiency of handling cargo and they also

reduce the CO2 emission account

Green ship certification system if a ship utilizes clean and CO2 emission

reduction technology on the ship building adds equipment and management and

son on certification would be received And the port authority gives some

incentive and preferential treatment among 45 ports Such as a better schedule is

provided for green membership ship priority in handing cargo and discount on

entrance fee

Incentives on the new cleaning technology There are two expressions about

this measure one is that the port authority give a incentive to ship which have a

great utilization on the new cleaning technology and the other one is that

environment provide many incentives to the authority which utilize the new

cleaning technology in the port such as LED street lamp solar power cranes

Green flag The Green Flag incentive program was set up to encourage ships to

slow down in order to improve air quality The Green Flag program provides

approximately $2 million a year in discounts for vessel operators who slow their

ships to 12 knots (22kmh) or less within 20miles (32km) of the harbor

34

According to the Port the Green Flag program reduced air pollution by 600tons in

2007 and is expected to do better in 2008

All of Green ship certification system incentives on the new cleaning

technology and Green Flag are incentives provided for users of port and aimed at

reduce port rates and charges So the 3 measures belong to affect port rates and

charges

Eco-friendly transport means conversion Eco-friendly means of transport are

much accounted of green port for example railway discharge less GHG emission

than truck barge with a clean engine among the river and inshore canal

Joint distribution joint distribution is a collaborative system which port

provides among many logistics companies It can make the cargo handling speed

rapidly and reduce cargo storage time for CO2 emission reducing such as

refrigerated container In an addition it also makes the logistics companies

transport more efficient

Cost on amount of CO2 emission differenced from other port the cost on

amount of CO2 is included in the port cost The cost aims to reduce the CO2

emission directly

CO2 emission reduction policies compared with other traditional port Green

Port gives more cost discount and incentives but in an addition there are many

policies on CO2 emission restriction Such as aging trucks restrictions in inland

transport department ship entry speed reduced and fuel changed in the ship

35

department and so on Whether these restriction policies constrain port

development or not and the degree of these policies constrain port development

will be explain by the AHP results

Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors some ports in the

western countries are opened as a travel place for visitors so as to change the

polluted impress and raise the position in our heart

Cost on amount of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction policies and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors can affect the social

circumstance factor Whether these measures can or not improve the social

circumstance and port competitiveness we have to see the next calculation and

results

36

Chapter 4 The Green Port Competitiveness

Analysis

41 The Green Port Competitiveness Model by AHP

The AHP is one multi-criteria decision making method which has been

extensively applied to a variety of decision-making situations The multi-criteria

techniques are considered to be a promising framework for evaluation of

decision-making factors since they have the potential to take into account

conflicting multidimensional incommensurable and uncertain effects of

decisions explicitly

In order to apply the AHP method a hierarchical decision schema was

constructed by decomposing the decision problem into its decision elements

37

After that the importance or preferences of the decision elements are examined in

a pair-wise comparison to the elements in the hierarchy The parameters are

estimated using pair-wise comparisons between the importance of the attribute or

decision element in the function using data made by each responder Making

comparisons is a question of which of the two attributes is more import as well as

how much more important

Follow these theories the Green Port Competitiveness Model choose factors as

follow in port competitiveness factors part there are port facilities port rates and

charges inland connection social circumstance in Green Port construction part

there are e-RTGC AMP AGV green ship certification system green flag

incentives on the new cleaning technology eco-friendly transport means

conversion joint distribution CO2 emission reduction policies cost on amount of

CO2 emission beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

38

Figure 41 Green Port Competitiveness AHP model

Follow the Green Port Competitiveness AHP as shown we set a questionnaire

survey to many experts scholars working in logistics system area And we got 15

ones and 14 ones results are believable and integrated

42 Green Port Competitiveness Analysis

39

The key to construction of the factors which affects the port competitiveness

is to determine the conceptual model The selection of the factors directly affects

the evaluation of the result In order to ensure the accuracy objectivity and

practicality of evaluation results the following basic principles must be followed

when selecting factors systematic principles the principle of universal

comparability practical principle and goal-oriented principle In view of the

foregoing the competitiveness which affected by Green Port construction model

is made The analysis follows established principles of port competitiveness

evaluation taking into account the characteristics and functions of the port as well

as port facilities port services port rates and charges ship entrance inland

connection social circumstances and so on

(1) Port facilities

e-RTGC U11 AMP U12 AGV U13

(2) Port rates and charges

Green ship certification system U21 Incentives on the new clean

technology U22 Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

(3) Inland connection

Eco-friendly means of transport U31 Joint distribution U32

(4) Social circumstances

40

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41 CO2 emission reduction policies

U42 Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors U43

Table 421 Details of Level I and Level II values

Level I

indicators Symbol Level II indicators Symbol

Port facilities A1

e-RTGC U11

AMP U12

AGV U13

Port rates and

charges A2

Green ship certification system U21

Incentives on the new clean technology U22

Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

Inland

connection A3

Eco-friendly means of transport U31

Joint distribution U32

Social

circumstances A4

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41

CO2 emissions reduction policies U42

Beautiful environment construction in inner

harbors U43

41

I Determination of level I indicator weights

As the ports competitiveness evaluation indicators at this level are complex

and the elements are not easily quantified AHP is adopted to determine the

indicator weights with the basic steps as follows

(1) Establish a comparative judgment matrix The comparative judgment

matrix is obtained through comparing contributed proportion of multiple

indicators to the overall target by the judgment scale wherein the fuzzy

judgment number introduced is 1 3 5 7 and 9 and the reciprocal of

such number indicates the important degree of one element relatively to

another The results are shown in next table

Table 422 Comparison matrix of level I indicators

A1 A2 A3 A4

A1 1 15 13 3

A2 5 1 3 7

A3 3 13 1 5

A4 13 17 15 1

(2) Calculate the characteristic vector of the comparative judgment matrix

which refers to the weighted vector of the indicator The writer adopts

42

the geometric method to calculate the characteristic vector The

calculated result is as follows

ω=(012 0560 026 006)T λmax=418 It can be obtained from the table

RI=09 Wherein ω is the characteristic vector corresponding to the

maximum characteristic value λmax of the comparative judgment matrix

namely the weighted vector of the indicator RI is the average

consistency indicator as shown in following table

Table423 Average random consistency indicator RI

Matrix Order

RI

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

0 0 058 09 112 124 132 141

Matrix Order

RI

9 10 11 12 13 14 15

145 149 152 154 156 158 159

(3) Conduct consistency check on the comparative judgment matrix Adopt

the random consistency proportion CR to judge the consistency of the

comparative judgment matrix According to CI= (λmax -n)(n-1) and

CR=CIRI it can be obtained through calculation CR=007lt01 Thus

this comparative judgment matrix has a satisfactory consistency and the

indicator weight coefficient calculated through this matrix is acceptable

43

II Determination of level II indicator weights

The data at this level are the details of level Ⅰ indicator The judgment

matrix obtained through comparing multiple sub-indicators under Level Ⅰ

indicators is adopted to determine the weights of sub-indicators under each

indicator one by one The specific steps are as follows

(1) The experts score the weights within the given range To determine the

weights of several small indicators under the same big indicator it is

supposed that the score of small indicator ｋ under the indicator j made

by the expert i is Xijk wherein i=12n n is the total number of

experts ј=12m m is the total number of LevelⅡ indicator к

=12Oj Oj is the number of small indicators under the big indicator ј

іјк IJK LRC l I j k

(2) The credit rating of the expert і is l l =1 2 3 l =1 indicates this expert

is quite familiar with the evaluated contents l =2 indicator this expert is

44

with the evaluated contents l =3 indicates this expert is not quite familiar

with the evaluated contents yi1 is the=08 yi2 =05 and yi3=1

(3) The comprehensive evaluation score of small indicator l under the

indicator j is as follows

(4) The formula for normalization processing of indicator weights is as

follows and the absolute weight of the indicator set is marked as

q=(q1q2q11)

(5) Because of the same justification and principle we donrsquot give the detail

about the calculation The same with the level Ⅰ calculation we

manipulation data one by one and get 14 results And obtain the average

45

results by weighted average method The results detail as Table for the

final weights of Level-Ⅱ evaluation indicators

Above the calculation process and method are just one of data from the

questionable surveys In this study the final results are got from the

weighted average by the results of each questionable survey

The final results are shown as Table424

Table424 Indicator weights table of indicator system

Level I

indicators Weight LevelⅡ indicators

Relative

weight

Absolute

weight

Importance

percentage

Port Facilities

A1 02735

e-RTGC U11 05506 01506 1506

AMP U12 01648 00451 451

AGV U13 02826 00773 773

Port Rates and

Charges A2

02902

Green ship certification s

ystem U21 04724 01371 1371

Incentives on the new

clean technology U22 02871 00833 833

Green Flag (speed

reduction incentive)U23 02405 00698 698

Inland

connection A3

02865

Eco-friendly means of

transport U31 05942 01702 1702

Joint distribution U32 04058 01163 1163

Social

environmentA4 00863

Cost on amount of CO2

emission U41 03698 00319 319

CO2 emissions reduction

policies U42 02273 00196 196

Beautiful environment

construction in inner

harbors U43

04029 00348 348

46

III Case study

In the questionable survey we also got the mark of Green Port measures

evaluation value of many main ports such as Singapore Port Shanghai Port

Hongkong Port Busan Port LALB Port Rotterdam Port and Yocohama Port

The highest mark is 5 and lowest one is 1

Table425 Evaluation value of many main ports

Singapore

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

LALB

Port

Rotterdam

Port

Yocohama

Port

Port facilities 38000 36000 34000 38182 38000 42000 32000

Port rates and

charges 32000 36000 31000 35455 32000 39000 33000

Inland

connection 39000 34545 35000 29091 35000 45000 36000

Social

circumstance 42000 32727 41000 32000 38000 42727 36000

With the Green Port and Port competitiveness indicator weights results these

ports got the final evaluation value

47

Table426 Final evaluation value on main ports Green Port measures and

competitiveness

Rotterdam

Port

Singapore

Port

LALB

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

Yocohama

Port

394 345 330 330 319 318 317

43 Results Analysis

From the results table we can obtain the many results as following

① The main Green Port measures which are more important to improve port

competitiveness are Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system the indicator weights are 01702 01506 and

01371 among the 11 indicators

② In the Green Port construction Cost on amount of CO2 emission and CO2

emissions reduction policies are the restrictions indicators but the weight

of two indicators are not big 00319 and 00196 So effect on Green Port

construction to port competitiveness does have the weaken capacity but

not clearly strengthen more clearly Thus Green Port construction really

could improve the port competitiveness

48

③ In the case study traditional ports Rotterdam and Singapore Port give us

better examples on Green Port construction especially Rotterdam Port

④ Hongkong Busan and Yocohama Port all got a lower evaluation value

But in detail Hongkong and Yocohama Port got a lower on the port

facilities and rates and charges Busan Port got a higher on the port

facilities and rates and charges but a lower on the inland connection and

social circumstance

⑤ Shanghai Port doesnrsquot have Particular strength factors but the

comprehensive strength is not bad the same as LALB Port

49

Chapter 5 Conclusion

In this thesis the effects of Green Port construction for improving the port

competitiveness have been studied Under the definition of Green Port the

characteristics of Green Port and its effects has been shown by analysing the AHP

method which based on the questionary survey for Green Port specialists and port

officers

Follow the results of analysis on Green Port competitiveness AHP model

Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green ship certification system is

better for Green Port Construction welcome for shipping companies and citizens

who live around the port And in the analysis of Port competitiveness factors port

rates and charges always affects port competitiveness a lot As a trend inland

connection factor abstracts more attention of shipping companies

50

On the trend of port department each port should take a activity to adjust

strategy for improving its competitiveness Such as in the main ports evaluation

Busan port get a high value on port rates and charges and port facilities but as a

lower value on inland connection factor the final value is not as well as we look

forward In the evaluation of Singapore Port through it gets a lower value on rates

and charges higher value on inland connection and social circumstance causes the

final value are better So the Green Port Construction may be a trend in port

department

In the results of this thesis Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system are better solutions for Green Port Construction And

especially it can be verified that the port rates and charges always affects port

competitiveness Futhermore the investment for Green Port construction and its

effects have to be verified in the future

51

References

1 Hoyle B S and Smith J 1992 Transport and Development In Modern

transport geography edited by B S Hoyle R D Knowles (London Belhaven

Press)pp11-31

2 Beresford A K C De Souza A J R G and Pettit S J 2005 Stategic

development of liner shipping companies and terminal operators Ocean yearbook

19(Chicago 1L The University of Chicago Press) pp 732-750

3 Heaver T D 2002 Supply chain and logistics management implications for

liner shipping In The handbook of maritime economics and business edited by C

Grammenos (LondonLLP) pp 375-396

4 Park T E (2011) A Study on selection criteria of Green Port and evaluation of

major Korean port A masters thesis of graduate school of Incheon university

52

5 JeongBH (2009)Green port management policy directions in the green

growth era- The case of Gwangyang port in Republic of Korea Journal of Korea

Port Economic Association Vol25(3) p361-384

6 Lee J S Han N H(2009) A study on Green Port Revitalization According to

Air Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

7 Lee Y K Nan J W(2010)Green Logistics Policy Analysis and Implications

of Japan

8 Lee B S (2010)Tendency and Countermeasures on Green Logistics in Port

Logistics Company A masters thesis of graduate school of Korean Maritime

university

9 Lee J S (2009) A Study on Green Port Revitalization According to Air

Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

10 Zhang F Y Li Z Lu X J Yao X L(2008)Competitiveness of Inland

Ports Based on F-AHP

11 Port of Long Beach (2009) Green Port Policy wwwpolbcom

12 The port of Los Angeles wwwportoflosangelesorg

X

List of Tables

Table 211 Objective of CO2 reduces in main countries 8

Table 221 4kinds Green Port construction promote directions 11

Table 231 Details of LALB Port Green Port Promotion Programs 13

Table 232 Short term and Long term Green Port Plans in Auckland Port 16

Table 233 Summary of the Main Port of Green Port Measures 21

Table 241 Green Port measures in port each department 23

Table 311 Prevention literature research results 27

Table 312 Literature research in Korean academia 28

Table 321 Main factor in the Pretentious Research 31

Table 421 Details of Level I and Level II values 40

Table 422 Comparison matrix of level I indicators 41

Table 423 Average random consistency indicator RI 42

Table 424 Indicator weights table of indicator system 45

Table 425 Evaluation value of many main ports 46

Table 426 Final evaluation value on main ports Green Port measures and

competitiveness 47

XI

CONTENT

Abstract V

List of Figures IX

List of Tables X

Chapter 1 Introduction 1

11 Research background and objective 1

12 Scope and structure of research 3

Chapter 2 Green Port Construction Situation 6

21 Green Port Construction Background 6

22 The Definition of Green Port 9

23 Green Port Construction Situation in major countries 12

24 Green Port Indicators Research 22

Chapter 3 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green Port

Construction 24

31 Port Competitiveness Literature Review 24

32 Port Competitiveness Development Tree 30

33 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green Port

Construction 32

Chapter 4 The Green Port Competitiveness Analysis 36

41 The Green Port Competitiveness Model by AHP 36

42 Green Port Competitiveness Analysis 38

XII

43 Results Analysis 47

Chapter 5 Conclusion 49

References 51

1

Chapter 1 Introduction

11 Research background and objective

The Kyoto Protocol is an international agreement linked to the United Nations

Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) The major feature of the

Kyoto Protocol is that it sets binding targets for 37 industrialized countries and the

European community for reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to fight

global warming These amounts will be lower an average of five per cent based on

1990 levels over the five-year period 2008-2012 The protocol was initially

adopted on 11 December 1997 in Japan but entered into force on 16 February

2005 As of July 2010 191 countries and states have signed and ratified the

protocol

2

After ltKyoto Protocolgt has brought out in 1997 more and more people put

their attention on environment pollution Rapid development in industry

department brings out air water soil noise and wildlife pollution and destruction

As the health development of economic alleviating environmental pollution and

restoring original ecology extremely necessary

Focus on the long-term and future development in the port many counties

government and ports authorities pay attentions on Green Port construction

In the short term C40 World Ports Climate Conference draws up some

adaptive plans among big cities and major ports The plans include the incentives

provided to green ship user cooperation among the C40 member ports

encouragement to develop and utilize the Alternative Maritime Power and so on

In EU Green Port major policies is prohibition the ship utilization on fuel

which sulfur content over 2 (after Jun2010 the limitation of sulfur content is

1) There are also Marco Polo I and Marco Polo II plans in EU In Marco Polo I

Modal Shift Action Catalyst Action and Common Learning Action are included

from 2003 to 2006 And after 2007 in Marco II Motorways of the Sea Action

Traffic Avoidance Actions and Rail Synergy are added

In US people pay more attention to developing the new technology for

reducing CO2 emission Such as power generator and renewable resources and

Northwest Ports Clean Air Strategy

3

Compared with other departments green policy in port department is explained

as green maritime and green shipping For example super-eco ship building and

Modal Shift promotion

The same aim to Hong Kong Ports AMP E-RTG hybrid truck bio-diesel

recycling energy CNG LNG and development are in utilization

ldquoGreen Growth Policyrdquo is the measure which brought out by the Korean

government Follow this strategy Korean port authority also takes out the ldquoGreen

Port building comprehensive planrdquo Furthermore low carbon self-sufficiency port

the disaster safety port eco-friendly port and resource recycling port are the

understandings on the Korean ldquoGreen Growth Policyrdquo

As the port support policies being changed port competitiveness factors are

changed Especially the importance degree of each factor has been changed a

lot The purpose of this study is explaining the competitiveness effects changed

which taking Green Port measures and programs port and give a better advice and

suggestion to Green Port construction

12 Scope and structure of research

The method to analysis the effects of Green Port construction for improving

port competitiveness is AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process)

4

And research process in this study is shown in ltFigure 1gt

ltFigure 1gt Research process

In chapter 1 research background and objective research method and process

are included And chapter 2 introduces the Green Port construction background

definition the Green Port construction situation in many countries and each

department introduction in Green Port construction The chapter 3 views the

literature on port competitiveness and obtains the influence factors used in this

study trend and relationship between port competitiveness The chapter 4 based

5

on the survey data and calculates each indicator importance degree by AHP

method and analysis the result Finally in chapter 5 the conclusion summary the

whole study by the result analysis

6

Chapter 2 Green Port Construction Situation

21 Green Port Construction Background

As the United Nations Secretary General has said the greatest challenge which

we are facing is environmental regulators It is a growing crisis with economic

health and safety food production security and other dimensions

The Kyoto Protocol is an international agreement linked to the United Nations

Framework Convention on Climate Change The major feature of the Kyoto

Protocol is that it sets binding targets for 37 industrialized countries and the

European community for reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to fight

global warming These amount to an average of five percent bellow 1990 level

over the five-year period 2008-2012

The protocol was initially adopted on 11 December 1997 in Japan but all of the

member countries entered into force on16 February 2005 The Kyoto Protocol

7

was adopted in Kyoto Japan on 11 December 1997 and entered into force on 16

February 2005 The detailed rules for the implementation of the Protocol were

adopted at COP 7 in Marrakesh in 2001 and are called the ldquoMarrakesh Accordsrdquo

Follow the ltKyoto Protocolgt several flexible mechanisms are allowed Such

as emissions trading the clean development mechanism (CDM) and joint

implementation The mechanisms allow AnnexⅠcounties to meet their GHG

emission limitations by purchasing GHG emission reductions credits from

elsewhere through financial exchanges projects that reduce emissions in

non-Annex Ⅰ countries or Annex Ⅰ countries with excess allowances The

mechanisms help stimulate green investment and help Parties meet their emission

targets in a cost-effective way

Therefore many countries take action on reducing the GHG discharge emission

For example increase the energy utilization efficiency develop the solar power

wind energy tidal energy and other clean energy in their industry The details

about objective of GHG emission reduction in main countries are displayed as the

following ltTable 1gt

8

ltTable 1gt Objective of CO2 reduce in main countries

Bench

mark of

Year

Objective

()

Absolute

quantity

()

Remark

EU 1990 20~30 -20~-30 Norway New Zealand 40 reducing

USA 2005 17 -3 Passed by House of Representatives

Japan 1990 25 -25 On the premise of attention with China

India

Korea 2020

(BAU) 30 mdashmdash

Discharge amount is up to 564million don

in estimation

China 2005 40~50 60~150

(2005) Each GDP

India 2005 20-25 mdashmdash With the developed countries

participation

Russia 1990 25 -25 Be neutral country

Norway 1990 30~40 -30~-40 mdashmdash

New

Zealand 1990 10~20 -10~ -20 mdashmdash

Austria 2000 5~25 -3~-11 mdashmdash

Canada 2003 20 -3 mdashmdash

Mexico 2002 50 mdashmdash With the developed countries

participation

South

Africa

2020

(BAU) 34 mdashmdash

With the developed countries

participation

Brazil 2020

(BAU) 36~39

-20

(2005) mdashmdash

(Korean Maritime Institute 20095)

9

22 The Definition of Green Port

As the global warming affecting in the world climate has been heavily changed

natural disaster frequently occurred natural resources depletion and supply

imbalance cause crisis to reach a high level For the purpose of getting away from

financial crisis and creating the new growth motivity the counties in the world

make more efforts on developing economic

Because of the realization of this global climate and environment crisis Korean

government had brought out the ldquoGreen Growth Policyrdquo And it made the ldquoGreen

Growth Policyrdquo be embodied and law-governed announced ldquoLow Carbon Green

Growth of the Basic Lawrdquo

In order to coordinate with this policy and law build up the ldquoGreen Growthrdquo

everyone make their efforts and reach ldquoGreen Growthrdquo in Korea each department

As a important industry department port authority also take activity to match the

national strategy of ldquoGreen Growthrdquo and draw up the plan on ldquoGreen Portrdquo

construction

However there isnrsquot a clear definition about the Green Port Korean Land

Transport and Maritime Ministry have explained the Green Port as follows Green

house gas Reducing Energy Effciencing Nature-friendly Port The explanation is

very easy to understand but from a professional point of view it not very

10

comprehensive and concrete So we have to understand the concept in the Green

Port Construction measures and programs There are about 4 kind explanation and

promotion programs in the Green Port Respectively the port which based on

green technology and green business creating new growth motive improving

living standards jumping in the ranks of the advanced port

ltFigure 2gt Green Port appearance and basic definition

In the Green Growth National Strategy Policy there are 10 pieces of policy

directions and 50 researches each department should choose the appropriate one

Follow these researches chose by port availability especially Low Carbon

11

Self-sufficiency Port The Disaster Safety Port Eco-friendly Port Resource

Recycling Port and in this study Green Port construction is a plan on

comprehensive and mix of 4kinds of Green Port Construction

Table 221 Four Promotions for Green Port Construction

Promotion Program

(Green Port type) Activities

Low-Carbon

Self-Sufficiency Port

Eco-friendly inland transportation system building

New renewable resources power equipment utilization

AMP LED utilization

The Disaster Safety

Port

Disaster Prevention environment infrastructure building

Disaster prediction and corresponding system utilization

Eco-Friendly Port Beauty the port by green park planting and so on

Provide eco-friendly port building programs

Resource Recycling

Port

Port waste (silt soil) effectively recycling system

Establish resource recycling port paragon

As table1 shown each type of Green Port has a separate emphasis

Eco-friendly inland transportation system which encourages utilizing rail canal

barge clean system reduces the truck application amount AMP means

Alternative Maritime Power supply system replaces with ship power generation

The Green Port construction in most of counties is the low-carbon self-sufficiency

12

port And in their construction maybe add a few other type promote director like

beauty the port by green park planting and so on

However in this study the Green Port concept is a comprehensive plan among

4 types not a specialization system

23 Green Port Construction Situation in major countries

After ltKyoto protocolgt having brought out each department began to take

affords on the reducing the GHG (greenhouse gas) emission In port department

the activities are embodied in the Green Port construction In this study many

major ports in US EU Japan and Korea are chose to explain for research

231 US

① LALB Port

In order to achieve to reduce marine pollutants standby and build clean port

LALB Port standby resource ministry and environment protection ministry

signed a 5year plan on clean standby action cooperation

This promotion business plan set a set of marine pollutants standby emission

limitation on the ship department from the statistics year 2006-2007 to 2010-2011

handling department heavy duty equipment truck department and so on Such as

13

in Green Port Technology construction department measures and programs are

shown in following Table

Table231 the details of LALB Port Green Port Promotion Programs

Promotion Program

Heavy Equipment Truck

Heavy Equipment

Replace and Update Aging Facilities

Substitute Fuels and Clean Fuel Incentives

Budgetary for the Development of Substitute Fuels

Marine Vessels Tugs

Ship Speed Reduction within the Port

Electrical supply of parking in the Berth

Use low-sulfur fuel (supplementary motor)

Handling Equipment

Air Quality Monitoring

Measure ambient air pollution levels in the vicinity of

the Port

Include a number of real-time air quality measurements

On the restrict situation of heavy equipment trucks and others vessels must to

be replaced and rebuilt in order to minimum the emission of NOx And the trucks

which donrsquot reach the regulate standard do not allowed to get in the port These

regulations will help their owner to replace and update trucks and also set up a

replacement plan to 16000 aging trucks make the replace done by 2012 As

foundation repaired the cargo owner must to pay an addition tax about 20ft 35$

40ft 79$

14

In the maritime department the speed reduction incentive took action in

Jan2005 When ship entry into the port boundary speed must be reduced under

20 miles 12kont At the beginning the effect of this plan is very clearly so the

limitation may be raised to 40mile And AMP (Alternative Maritime Power ) is

encouraged to be built and developed as to ship use their engine and get GHG

emission

② New York- New Jersey Port

The New York- New Jersey Port Authority brought out environment policy on

CO2 emission reduction The main concepts as following first reduce PX SOX

3 each year and CO2 5 Second ship must utilize sulfur-low fuel as a

obligation Third AMP is provided Forth modern the unloading and loading

equipment must be built Fifth promote trucks replacement Sixth reform the ship

engine Seventh invent 9 billion dollars in the following 10 years Eighth invent

to all hybrid equipment (325) Ninth install the hybrid truck in AMPT and

NYCT

③ Seattle Port

15

In Seattle Port Air Environment Maritime Improvement plan has been

accepted in 2005 The plan includes first set up Puget Sound Maritime Air

Forum and make one AMP provide services for two tour ships second change

the diesel hybrid equipment into electric utilization Third use bio-diesel and

diesel catalyst and reduce the emission Forth emphasize the standard and plan of

truck minimum the idling time

Seattle Port Tacoma Port and Vancouver made a assignment and promote

ldquoNorthwest Ports Clean Air Strategyrdquo

④ Auckland Port

Auckland Port set up the aging replacement plan in 2008 and invent 20 milion

dollars gas emission should reach the level And cargo transport system in port

hinterland port authority and Air environment management committee make

cooperation and give an incentive to truck which use new clean technology

Table232 Short term and Long term Green Port Plans in Auckland Port

16

17

232 EU

Rotterdam Port

As the biggest Port in EU Rotterdam Port takes more affords in reducing the

CO2 emission Main programs are low carbon footprint AMP and so on The

limitation of CO2 emission reduces down 50 of 1990 by 2025

In July 2008 the authority of Rotterdam port gave international cooperation

with other ports an extra boost by organizing the World Ports Climate Conference

During this conference the authority of Rotterdam discussed possible ways in

which ports and business could reduce air pollution and CO2 emissions The

proposals the authority of Rotterdam was set out in a declaration which was

supported by all 55 port cities attending the conference The conference resulted

in five projects to improve air quality and reduce CO2 emissions The authority of

Rotterdam is behind the project to further elaborate an Environmental Ship Index

The Rotterdam Climate Initiative is a joint venture with the municipality of

Rotterdam DCMR Environmental Protection Agency Rijnmond and Deltalinqs

Common goal is to halve CO2 emissions in the region by 2025 in comparison with

1990 levels In connection with the Rotterdam Climate Initiative the port works

on (together with DCMR and others) creating an infrastructure for the capture

18

transport and storage of CO2 A business case presented in the summer of 2008 is

now being elaborated into a business plan The business case concludes that

Rotterdam can begin in 2015 with the capture transport and underground storage

of five million tons of CO2 per annum This means that the basic infrastructure

will then be in place for further growth in capture and storage to twenty million

tons in 2025

In 2008 a start was made on the development of a sustainability index for

activities relating to the P for Planet (environment) In 2009 it will further expand

the index to cover the P for People and the P for Profit In the first phase of the

sustainability index CO2 footprint sustainable purchasing sustainable building

and sustainable land allocation will be covered

233 Japan

① Tacoma Port

In the Tacoma Port there are some programs on protecting the air water and

soil environment

In the air protection department ldquoNorthwest Ports Clean Air Strategyrdquo

ldquoGreen Gateway for Traderdquo and ldquoTruck Programrdquo had brought out to against air

pollution The concepts include using ultra-low sulfur diesel bio-diesel and other

cleaner-burning fuels in cargo-handling equipment using low-sulfur distillate

19

fuels at berth adding ldquogreen designrdquo environmental features to ships including

diesel-electric motors that save up to 30 percent in fuel and significantly reduce

emissions setting targets to change older less-efficient truck engines installing

anti-idling devices on rail-switching engines as well as partnering on other

innovative technological advance

The Port of Tacomarsquos four dockside rail yards move cargo quickly and

efficiently from container terminals They also reduce the number of trucks on

city streets and highways Each full train that leaves the Port represents 250 to 300

trucks not on our roads reducing roadway congestion and diesel emissions The

lowest emission route to ship cargo from Asia to the US Midwest is through the

Puget Sound according to the results of a study by Herbert Engineering released

in May 2009

And in the land protection program there are successful clean projects open

spaces and future habitat restoration In 2007 the Port purchased about 70 acres

of open space known as Juliarsquos Gulch and Storey Pit located between the

Tideflats and residential Northeast Tacoma Monitor water quality system is in

utilization in the water department in Tacoma Port

② Tokyo Port

In the Tokyo Port Green Port programs are almost similar with Tacoma Port

e-RTGC (Rubber Tired Gantry Crane) the barge between Tokyo and Yocohama

20

which shorten international maritime container cargo transportation land distance

super eco-shipbuilding technology dissemination and promotion green business

certification operation and shippers and logistics companies support cooperation

③ Osaka Port and Hakata Port

AMP electrical power equipment and solar power equipment are in utilization in

Osaka Port E-RTGC and solar power of refrigerated container are in utilization in

the Hakata Port

234 Korea

In Busan Port a set of Green Port took implementation such as LNG truck

E-RTGC equipment utilization eco-friendly transport means conversion (rail

canal barge) and GHG emission reduction obligation Table233

21

ltTable 233gt Summary of the Main Port of Green Port Measures

COUNTRY PORT MEASURES

US

LALB Port

Green flag AMP discharge gas reduction obligation

recommends use of alternative fuels and clean fuel

funding for the development of alternative fuels facilities

by new engine development instead of NOx emissions

green truck program (reduce70-80) low-sulfur fuel

utilization restore and revitalize the Los Cerritos

Wetlands

New York

Port

AMP modernized facilities utilization high speed hybrid

yard

Auckland

Port

Incentives on the new cleaning technology containers

transportation system

Seattle Port

AMP green ship membership Tier 4 level reducing PM

by 1994 level Smart Way program Northwest Ports

Clean Air Strategy

EU Rotterdam

Port

Clean engine (barge) green ship membership carbon

footprint calculation cruise ship which under port

authority change to use low-sulfur fuel low emission

engine development and utilization Green Award AMP

ship recycling incentives

Japan

Tokyo Port

RTGC (Rubber Tired Gantry Crane) apply for the barge

between Tokyo and Yocohama shorten international

maritime container cargo transportation land distance

super eco-shipbuilding technology dissemination and

promotion green business certification operation

shippers and logistics companies support cooperation

Osaka Port AMP electrical power equipment solar power equipment

Hakata Port E-RTGC solar power utilization in refrigerated container

Korea Busan Port

LNG truck E-RTGC eco-friendly transport means

conversion (rail canal barge) GHG emission reduction

obligation

22

24 Green Port Indicators Research

As the previous section list shown Green Port measures and programs are

substantially the same

When a ship entry in the port boundary from voyage many ports give a

incentive on shifting and utilizing sulfur-low fuel and reducing the speed under

20 miles when the ship berth in the port the alternative maritime power are

provided which replace its power generation

Next in the cargo unloading and loading department the same with above

utilization of sulfur-low fuel and electrical equipment are promoted and

eco-driving education to driver is necessary what speed is fuel fully burning and

emission minimum point

In the cargo transport department in other words truck department the

replacement on aging trucks is popular in many ports aging trucks are prohibited

close to port at the same time an incentive or support function are provided on

aging replacement The automated equipments are recommended to utilize in the

Green Port like hybrid yard tractor And a perfect plan on truck running also could

reduce the idling time and against the emission of CO2

The details reference the following Table 241

23

Table241 Green Port measures in port each department

Emission reduction programs

Ship

department

Shipping

in the

port

boundary

Obligation on the utilization of sulfur-low fuel

Reform ship engine and utilize hybrid

Speed reduce in the port entrance(a off-shore fee

incentive)

Off-shore AMP

Shift utilization system of clean fuel

Unloading and loading

department

Obligation on the utilization of sulfur-low fuel

Replace electrical equipment

Eco-driving

Truck department Hybrid yard tractor utilization

Promote aging truck replacement

Minimum the idling time

Others LED light in the Port

Develop renew and recycle resource energy

The Green Port measures in this study are e-RTGC AMP AGV Green Ship

certification system incentives on the new clean technology Green Flag(speed

reduction incentive)eco-friendly transport means conversion joint distribution

the cost on account of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction polities and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

The details and definition on each Green Port measure and the relationship with

Port Competitiveness will be expressed in next chapter

24

Chapter 3 The Relationship between Port

Competitiveness and Green Port Construction

31 Port Competitiveness Literature Review

Although past studies on port selection models have focused on port selection

made by port facilities port services port rates and charge and location

Murphy made a survey between 534 shipping companies and port authorities in

1989 and between 1850 shipping companies and port authorities in 1992

Comparing with other papers Murphys got a survey among more widely

objects In his paper port selection(port competitiveness) was seen to affected by

facilities situation appropriate pilotage max ship entrance probability the

25

capability of handling non-regular cargos whether to provide information of ship

nationality or not and port services level

In French model (1979) there are two factors affecting the port selection (port

competitiveness) endogenous factor and exogenous factor In endogenous factors

there are adequacy and physical plant condition of terminal facilities terminal rate

and charges frequency and geographic coverage of ship and freight services the

capacity of connecting to inland rails or transport net and the services provides for

the shipping or logistics And exogenous factors included the size and economic

capacity of hinterland as a source exports or market for imports national

economic situation trade policy and support established by government the

situation at home and abroad

The same as Frenchs paper in Paters paper in 1990 there are endogenous and

exogenous factors too In endogenous there are the services provides for the

shipping or logistics capacity of terminal facilities situation and condition of

facilities operation strategies established by port authority convenience to utilize

And the political situation at home and abroad social change economic factor

stabilized labor and capital However in 2004 there is a tremendous change in

Peters new paper There are four parts multi-modal process interface transport

modes infrastructure Multi-model Process part includes ship entrance rapid

speed and accuracy shipper and shipping companies reactive operation flexibility

Interface includes labor power information technology and so on And there are

26

ship calls frequency and amount of fleet factors in the transport modes part In the

infrastructure part includes port facility equipments and so on

Port facilities rates and charges services inland situation and social

circumstance factors affect the port selection and competitiveness a lot from the

research until 1992 by Murphy And in Lirn and Pater research 2003-2004 the

new and detail factors are shown to us

We can clearly see the contents in next table

27

Table 311 Prevention literature research results

Influence factors

French

(1979)

Endogenous

port facilities port rate and charges calls frequency port services

port connection with inland

Exogenous

economic size of hinterland national economic situation trade

policy home and abroad situation

Willingale

(1982)

voyage distance economy size entrance to port and route port

facilities max ship entrance probability port operation rates and

charges port authority scale of port

Slack

(1985)

cost of inland transportation port proximity ship demurrage

multi-transport

Peter

(1990)

Endogenous

port facilities condition of facilities operation strategies

convenience to utilize

Exogenous

political situation social change economic factor stabilized labor

and capital

UNCTAD

(1992)

port facilities services location level of financial industry

information communication system social circumstances economic

stability

Murphy

(1992)

facilities situation appropriate pilotage max ship entrance

probability the capability of handling non-regular cargos whether to

provide information of ship nationality or not port services level

Lirn

(2003-2004)

physical and technologic facilities geopolitical location port

operation and management shipping and terminal cost

Peter

(2004)

Multi-modal Process

ship entrance rapid speed and accuracy shipper and shipping

companies reactive operation flexibility

Interface labor and capital

Transport modes ship calls frequency and amount of fleet factors

28

And there are many experts and scholars research for the influence factors to

port selection and competitiveness in Korea The specific content follows table5

Table 312 Literature research in Korean academia

Influence factors

Jeon Il-su (1992) location facilities charges service level (EDI) terminal operation

port authority

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

( 1993 )

location facilities throughput charges service operation

situation

Kim Hak-so

(1993)

export shipping amount of annual cost of each ton of cargo

marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km of

cargo loading time

import marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km

of cargo amount of liner ship

Yeo Gi-tae (1996) location facilities throughput charge service operation situation

Ha Dong-u amp

Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

location facilities service level logistics charges environment of

logistics service

Yeo Gi-tae (1999) location facilities throughput charges service

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

throughput quay length yard area GNP

Kum Jong-su

(2001)

distance between port and cargo site terminal facilities service

the capacity of multi-transport capacity of cargo handling

administrative service rates and charges of inland transport

congestion

Yeo Gi-tae (2002) location throughput facilities service level

Kim Jin-gu (2002) port facilities location cargo amount rates and charges services

29

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005)

voyage degree to attract cargo cargo handling cost amount of

handling cargo connection to inland service reliability location

berth availability quay length feeder network depth

transshipment volumes cargo security profitability

offing degree to attract cargo berth availability cargo handling

cost transshipment volumes

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005)

cargo handling amount port facilities location rates and charges

level of service

Heo Yun-su

(2005)

port facilities rates and charges services marketing geopolitics

location economic and social circumstance

Kim Geun-seop

(2007)

port services facilities cargo handling amount location cost

productivity factor global factor

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) rates and charges services port characteristics

Many experts and scholars make a research on port selection and

competitiveness recently But the factors selection criteria are difference

Nevertheless the main factors are facilities services cost and so on

Therefore port competitiveness factors which chose in this study are port

facilities port services port rates and charges and social circumstance

However the main factors are not the whole factors any more more and more

detail factors and characteristic factors appearance Port selection and

competitiveness factors have changed And the development content is introduced

in next part

30

32 Port Competitiveness Development Tree

As mentioned above port facilities port rates and charges and port location are

the basic factors in the port selection and competitiveness

From the following table we can discover that first one facilities rates and

charges and location are the most important factor in port selection and

competitiveness second one the importance of social circumstance turns larger

inland connection is necessary all the time

Table 321 Main factor in the Pretentious Research

31

port facilities rates and

charges

inland

connection

social

circumstance location

French (1979) radic radic radic

Wiliingale (1982) radic radic

Slack (1985) radic

Pater (1990) radic radic

UNCTAD (1992) radic radic radic

Murphy(1992) radic

Jeon Il-su (1992) radic radic radic

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

(1993)

radic radic radic

Kim Hak-so

(1993) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1996) radic radic radic

Ha Dong-u

amp Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1998) radic radic radic

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

radic

Kum Jong-su

(2001) radic radic radic radic

Kim Jin-gu(2002) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(2002) radic radic

Lirn(2003-2004) radic radic radic

Pater(2004) radic

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005) radic radic radic

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005) radic radic radic

Heo Yun-su

(2005) radic radic radic radic

Kim Geun-seop

(2007) radic radic radic radic

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) radic

32

33 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green

Port Construction

Following the research above Port facilities rates and charges inland

connection and social circumstance are chose in this study port selection and

competitiveness department

e-RTGC Electric rubber tired gantry crane is a mobile gantry crane used for

stacking intermodal containers within the stacking areas of a container terminal

e-RTGC are used at container terminals and container storage yards to straddling

multiple lanes of railroad and container storage or when maximum storage

density in the container stack is desired

AMP is shorted for Alternative Marine Power and Itrsquos a facility which

provides the electric system in the land for ship which entry in the port The

facility can reduce emissions which ship get entrance in the port

AGV is a mobile robot that follows markers or wires in the floor or uses

vision or lasers They are most often used in industrial applications to move

materials around a manufacturing facility or a warehouse Automatic Guided

Vehicle systems work around-the-clock making continuous flow and just-in-time

delivery easier to achieve Application of the automatic guided vehicle has broade

33

ned during the late 20th century and they are no longer restricted to industrial

environments

The e-RTGC AMP and AGV are the new clean facilities and equipments in the

Green Port they donrsquot reduce the efficiency of handling cargo and they also

reduce the CO2 emission account

Green ship certification system if a ship utilizes clean and CO2 emission

reduction technology on the ship building adds equipment and management and

son on certification would be received And the port authority gives some

incentive and preferential treatment among 45 ports Such as a better schedule is

provided for green membership ship priority in handing cargo and discount on

entrance fee

Incentives on the new cleaning technology There are two expressions about

this measure one is that the port authority give a incentive to ship which have a

great utilization on the new cleaning technology and the other one is that

environment provide many incentives to the authority which utilize the new

cleaning technology in the port such as LED street lamp solar power cranes

Green flag The Green Flag incentive program was set up to encourage ships to

slow down in order to improve air quality The Green Flag program provides

approximately $2 million a year in discounts for vessel operators who slow their

ships to 12 knots (22kmh) or less within 20miles (32km) of the harbor

34

According to the Port the Green Flag program reduced air pollution by 600tons in

2007 and is expected to do better in 2008

All of Green ship certification system incentives on the new cleaning

technology and Green Flag are incentives provided for users of port and aimed at

reduce port rates and charges So the 3 measures belong to affect port rates and

charges

Eco-friendly transport means conversion Eco-friendly means of transport are

much accounted of green port for example railway discharge less GHG emission

than truck barge with a clean engine among the river and inshore canal

Joint distribution joint distribution is a collaborative system which port

provides among many logistics companies It can make the cargo handling speed

rapidly and reduce cargo storage time for CO2 emission reducing such as

refrigerated container In an addition it also makes the logistics companies

transport more efficient

Cost on amount of CO2 emission differenced from other port the cost on

amount of CO2 is included in the port cost The cost aims to reduce the CO2

emission directly

CO2 emission reduction policies compared with other traditional port Green

Port gives more cost discount and incentives but in an addition there are many

policies on CO2 emission restriction Such as aging trucks restrictions in inland

transport department ship entry speed reduced and fuel changed in the ship

35

department and so on Whether these restriction policies constrain port

development or not and the degree of these policies constrain port development

will be explain by the AHP results

Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors some ports in the

western countries are opened as a travel place for visitors so as to change the

polluted impress and raise the position in our heart

Cost on amount of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction policies and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors can affect the social

circumstance factor Whether these measures can or not improve the social

circumstance and port competitiveness we have to see the next calculation and

results

36

Chapter 4 The Green Port Competitiveness

Analysis

41 The Green Port Competitiveness Model by AHP

The AHP is one multi-criteria decision making method which has been

extensively applied to a variety of decision-making situations The multi-criteria

techniques are considered to be a promising framework for evaluation of

decision-making factors since they have the potential to take into account

conflicting multidimensional incommensurable and uncertain effects of

decisions explicitly

In order to apply the AHP method a hierarchical decision schema was

constructed by decomposing the decision problem into its decision elements

37

After that the importance or preferences of the decision elements are examined in

a pair-wise comparison to the elements in the hierarchy The parameters are

estimated using pair-wise comparisons between the importance of the attribute or

decision element in the function using data made by each responder Making

comparisons is a question of which of the two attributes is more import as well as

how much more important

Follow these theories the Green Port Competitiveness Model choose factors as

follow in port competitiveness factors part there are port facilities port rates and

charges inland connection social circumstance in Green Port construction part

there are e-RTGC AMP AGV green ship certification system green flag

incentives on the new cleaning technology eco-friendly transport means

conversion joint distribution CO2 emission reduction policies cost on amount of

CO2 emission beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

38

Figure 41 Green Port Competitiveness AHP model

Follow the Green Port Competitiveness AHP as shown we set a questionnaire

survey to many experts scholars working in logistics system area And we got 15

ones and 14 ones results are believable and integrated

42 Green Port Competitiveness Analysis

39

The key to construction of the factors which affects the port competitiveness

is to determine the conceptual model The selection of the factors directly affects

the evaluation of the result In order to ensure the accuracy objectivity and

practicality of evaluation results the following basic principles must be followed

when selecting factors systematic principles the principle of universal

comparability practical principle and goal-oriented principle In view of the

foregoing the competitiveness which affected by Green Port construction model

is made The analysis follows established principles of port competitiveness

evaluation taking into account the characteristics and functions of the port as well

as port facilities port services port rates and charges ship entrance inland

connection social circumstances and so on

(1) Port facilities

e-RTGC U11 AMP U12 AGV U13

(2) Port rates and charges

Green ship certification system U21 Incentives on the new clean

technology U22 Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

(3) Inland connection

Eco-friendly means of transport U31 Joint distribution U32

(4) Social circumstances

40

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41 CO2 emission reduction policies

U42 Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors U43

Table 421 Details of Level I and Level II values

Level I

indicators Symbol Level II indicators Symbol

Port facilities A1

e-RTGC U11

AMP U12

AGV U13

Port rates and

charges A2

Green ship certification system U21

Incentives on the new clean technology U22

Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

Inland

connection A3

Eco-friendly means of transport U31

Joint distribution U32

Social

circumstances A4

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41

CO2 emissions reduction policies U42

Beautiful environment construction in inner

harbors U43

41

I Determination of level I indicator weights

As the ports competitiveness evaluation indicators at this level are complex

and the elements are not easily quantified AHP is adopted to determine the

indicator weights with the basic steps as follows

(1) Establish a comparative judgment matrix The comparative judgment

matrix is obtained through comparing contributed proportion of multiple

indicators to the overall target by the judgment scale wherein the fuzzy

judgment number introduced is 1 3 5 7 and 9 and the reciprocal of

such number indicates the important degree of one element relatively to

another The results are shown in next table

Table 422 Comparison matrix of level I indicators

A1 A2 A3 A4

A1 1 15 13 3

A2 5 1 3 7

A3 3 13 1 5

A4 13 17 15 1

(2) Calculate the characteristic vector of the comparative judgment matrix

which refers to the weighted vector of the indicator The writer adopts

42

the geometric method to calculate the characteristic vector The

calculated result is as follows

ω=(012 0560 026 006)T λmax=418 It can be obtained from the table

RI=09 Wherein ω is the characteristic vector corresponding to the

maximum characteristic value λmax of the comparative judgment matrix

namely the weighted vector of the indicator RI is the average

consistency indicator as shown in following table

Table423 Average random consistency indicator RI

Matrix Order

RI

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

0 0 058 09 112 124 132 141

Matrix Order

RI

9 10 11 12 13 14 15

145 149 152 154 156 158 159

(3) Conduct consistency check on the comparative judgment matrix Adopt

the random consistency proportion CR to judge the consistency of the

comparative judgment matrix According to CI= (λmax -n)(n-1) and

CR=CIRI it can be obtained through calculation CR=007lt01 Thus

this comparative judgment matrix has a satisfactory consistency and the

indicator weight coefficient calculated through this matrix is acceptable

43

II Determination of level II indicator weights

The data at this level are the details of level Ⅰ indicator The judgment

matrix obtained through comparing multiple sub-indicators under Level Ⅰ

indicators is adopted to determine the weights of sub-indicators under each

indicator one by one The specific steps are as follows

(1) The experts score the weights within the given range To determine the

weights of several small indicators under the same big indicator it is

supposed that the score of small indicator ｋ under the indicator j made

by the expert i is Xijk wherein i=12n n is the total number of

experts ј=12m m is the total number of LevelⅡ indicator к

=12Oj Oj is the number of small indicators under the big indicator ј

іјк IJK LRC l I j k

(2) The credit rating of the expert і is l l =1 2 3 l =1 indicates this expert

is quite familiar with the evaluated contents l =2 indicator this expert is

44

with the evaluated contents l =3 indicates this expert is not quite familiar

with the evaluated contents yi1 is the=08 yi2 =05 and yi3=1

(3) The comprehensive evaluation score of small indicator l under the

indicator j is as follows

(4) The formula for normalization processing of indicator weights is as

follows and the absolute weight of the indicator set is marked as

q=(q1q2q11)

(5) Because of the same justification and principle we donrsquot give the detail

about the calculation The same with the level Ⅰ calculation we

manipulation data one by one and get 14 results And obtain the average

45

results by weighted average method The results detail as Table for the

final weights of Level-Ⅱ evaluation indicators

Above the calculation process and method are just one of data from the

questionable surveys In this study the final results are got from the

weighted average by the results of each questionable survey

The final results are shown as Table424

Table424 Indicator weights table of indicator system

Level I

indicators Weight LevelⅡ indicators

Relative

weight

Absolute

weight

Importance

percentage

Port Facilities

A1 02735

e-RTGC U11 05506 01506 1506

AMP U12 01648 00451 451

AGV U13 02826 00773 773

Port Rates and

Charges A2

02902

Green ship certification s

ystem U21 04724 01371 1371

Incentives on the new

clean technology U22 02871 00833 833

Green Flag (speed

reduction incentive)U23 02405 00698 698

Inland

connection A3

02865

Eco-friendly means of

transport U31 05942 01702 1702

Joint distribution U32 04058 01163 1163

Social

environmentA4 00863

Cost on amount of CO2

emission U41 03698 00319 319

CO2 emissions reduction

policies U42 02273 00196 196

Beautiful environment

construction in inner

harbors U43

04029 00348 348

46

III Case study

In the questionable survey we also got the mark of Green Port measures

evaluation value of many main ports such as Singapore Port Shanghai Port

Hongkong Port Busan Port LALB Port Rotterdam Port and Yocohama Port

The highest mark is 5 and lowest one is 1

Table425 Evaluation value of many main ports

Singapore

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

LALB

Port

Rotterdam

Port

Yocohama

Port

Port facilities 38000 36000 34000 38182 38000 42000 32000

Port rates and

charges 32000 36000 31000 35455 32000 39000 33000

Inland

connection 39000 34545 35000 29091 35000 45000 36000

Social

circumstance 42000 32727 41000 32000 38000 42727 36000

With the Green Port and Port competitiveness indicator weights results these

ports got the final evaluation value

47

Table426 Final evaluation value on main ports Green Port measures and

competitiveness

Rotterdam

Port

Singapore

Port

LALB

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

Yocohama

Port

394 345 330 330 319 318 317

43 Results Analysis

From the results table we can obtain the many results as following

① The main Green Port measures which are more important to improve port

competitiveness are Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system the indicator weights are 01702 01506 and

01371 among the 11 indicators

② In the Green Port construction Cost on amount of CO2 emission and CO2

emissions reduction policies are the restrictions indicators but the weight

of two indicators are not big 00319 and 00196 So effect on Green Port

construction to port competitiveness does have the weaken capacity but

not clearly strengthen more clearly Thus Green Port construction really

could improve the port competitiveness

48

③ In the case study traditional ports Rotterdam and Singapore Port give us

better examples on Green Port construction especially Rotterdam Port

④ Hongkong Busan and Yocohama Port all got a lower evaluation value

But in detail Hongkong and Yocohama Port got a lower on the port

facilities and rates and charges Busan Port got a higher on the port

facilities and rates and charges but a lower on the inland connection and

social circumstance

⑤ Shanghai Port doesnrsquot have Particular strength factors but the

comprehensive strength is not bad the same as LALB Port

49

Chapter 5 Conclusion

In this thesis the effects of Green Port construction for improving the port

competitiveness have been studied Under the definition of Green Port the

characteristics of Green Port and its effects has been shown by analysing the AHP

method which based on the questionary survey for Green Port specialists and port

officers

Follow the results of analysis on Green Port competitiveness AHP model

Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green ship certification system is

better for Green Port Construction welcome for shipping companies and citizens

who live around the port And in the analysis of Port competitiveness factors port

rates and charges always affects port competitiveness a lot As a trend inland

connection factor abstracts more attention of shipping companies

50

On the trend of port department each port should take a activity to adjust

strategy for improving its competitiveness Such as in the main ports evaluation

Busan port get a high value on port rates and charges and port facilities but as a

lower value on inland connection factor the final value is not as well as we look

forward In the evaluation of Singapore Port through it gets a lower value on rates

and charges higher value on inland connection and social circumstance causes the

final value are better So the Green Port Construction may be a trend in port

department

In the results of this thesis Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system are better solutions for Green Port Construction And

especially it can be verified that the port rates and charges always affects port

competitiveness Futhermore the investment for Green Port construction and its

effects have to be verified in the future

51

References

1 Hoyle B S and Smith J 1992 Transport and Development In Modern

transport geography edited by B S Hoyle R D Knowles (London Belhaven

Press)pp11-31

2 Beresford A K C De Souza A J R G and Pettit S J 2005 Stategic

development of liner shipping companies and terminal operators Ocean yearbook

19(Chicago 1L The University of Chicago Press) pp 732-750

3 Heaver T D 2002 Supply chain and logistics management implications for

liner shipping In The handbook of maritime economics and business edited by C

Grammenos (LondonLLP) pp 375-396

4 Park T E (2011) A Study on selection criteria of Green Port and evaluation of

major Korean port A masters thesis of graduate school of Incheon university

52

5 JeongBH (2009)Green port management policy directions in the green

growth era- The case of Gwangyang port in Republic of Korea Journal of Korea

Port Economic Association Vol25(3) p361-384

6 Lee J S Han N H(2009) A study on Green Port Revitalization According to

Air Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

7 Lee Y K Nan J W(2010)Green Logistics Policy Analysis and Implications

of Japan

8 Lee B S (2010)Tendency and Countermeasures on Green Logistics in Port

Logistics Company A masters thesis of graduate school of Korean Maritime

university

9 Lee J S (2009) A Study on Green Port Revitalization According to Air

Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

10 Zhang F Y Li Z Lu X J Yao X L(2008)Competitiveness of Inland

Ports Based on F-AHP

11 Port of Long Beach (2009) Green Port Policy wwwpolbcom

12 The port of Los Angeles wwwportoflosangelesorg

XI

CONTENT

Abstract V

List of Figures IX

List of Tables X

Chapter 1 Introduction 1

11 Research background and objective 1

12 Scope and structure of research 3

Chapter 2 Green Port Construction Situation 6

21 Green Port Construction Background 6

22 The Definition of Green Port 9

23 Green Port Construction Situation in major countries 12

24 Green Port Indicators Research 22

Chapter 3 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green Port

Construction 24

31 Port Competitiveness Literature Review 24

32 Port Competitiveness Development Tree 30

33 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green Port

Construction 32

Chapter 4 The Green Port Competitiveness Analysis 36

41 The Green Port Competitiveness Model by AHP 36

42 Green Port Competitiveness Analysis 38

XII

43 Results Analysis 47

Chapter 5 Conclusion 49

References 51

1

Chapter 1 Introduction

11 Research background and objective

The Kyoto Protocol is an international agreement linked to the United Nations

Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) The major feature of the

Kyoto Protocol is that it sets binding targets for 37 industrialized countries and the

European community for reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to fight

global warming These amounts will be lower an average of five per cent based on

1990 levels over the five-year period 2008-2012 The protocol was initially

adopted on 11 December 1997 in Japan but entered into force on 16 February

2005 As of July 2010 191 countries and states have signed and ratified the

protocol

2

After ltKyoto Protocolgt has brought out in 1997 more and more people put

their attention on environment pollution Rapid development in industry

department brings out air water soil noise and wildlife pollution and destruction

As the health development of economic alleviating environmental pollution and

restoring original ecology extremely necessary

Focus on the long-term and future development in the port many counties

government and ports authorities pay attentions on Green Port construction

In the short term C40 World Ports Climate Conference draws up some

adaptive plans among big cities and major ports The plans include the incentives

provided to green ship user cooperation among the C40 member ports

encouragement to develop and utilize the Alternative Maritime Power and so on

In EU Green Port major policies is prohibition the ship utilization on fuel

which sulfur content over 2 (after Jun2010 the limitation of sulfur content is

1) There are also Marco Polo I and Marco Polo II plans in EU In Marco Polo I

Modal Shift Action Catalyst Action and Common Learning Action are included

from 2003 to 2006 And after 2007 in Marco II Motorways of the Sea Action

Traffic Avoidance Actions and Rail Synergy are added

In US people pay more attention to developing the new technology for

reducing CO2 emission Such as power generator and renewable resources and

Northwest Ports Clean Air Strategy

3

Compared with other departments green policy in port department is explained

as green maritime and green shipping For example super-eco ship building and

Modal Shift promotion

The same aim to Hong Kong Ports AMP E-RTG hybrid truck bio-diesel

recycling energy CNG LNG and development are in utilization

ldquoGreen Growth Policyrdquo is the measure which brought out by the Korean

government Follow this strategy Korean port authority also takes out the ldquoGreen

Port building comprehensive planrdquo Furthermore low carbon self-sufficiency port

the disaster safety port eco-friendly port and resource recycling port are the

understandings on the Korean ldquoGreen Growth Policyrdquo

As the port support policies being changed port competitiveness factors are

changed Especially the importance degree of each factor has been changed a

lot The purpose of this study is explaining the competitiveness effects changed

which taking Green Port measures and programs port and give a better advice and

suggestion to Green Port construction

12 Scope and structure of research

The method to analysis the effects of Green Port construction for improving

port competitiveness is AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process)

4

And research process in this study is shown in ltFigure 1gt

ltFigure 1gt Research process

In chapter 1 research background and objective research method and process

are included And chapter 2 introduces the Green Port construction background

definition the Green Port construction situation in many countries and each

department introduction in Green Port construction The chapter 3 views the

literature on port competitiveness and obtains the influence factors used in this

study trend and relationship between port competitiveness The chapter 4 based

5

on the survey data and calculates each indicator importance degree by AHP

method and analysis the result Finally in chapter 5 the conclusion summary the

whole study by the result analysis

6

Chapter 2 Green Port Construction Situation

21 Green Port Construction Background

As the United Nations Secretary General has said the greatest challenge which

we are facing is environmental regulators It is a growing crisis with economic

health and safety food production security and other dimensions

The Kyoto Protocol is an international agreement linked to the United Nations

Framework Convention on Climate Change The major feature of the Kyoto

Protocol is that it sets binding targets for 37 industrialized countries and the

European community for reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to fight

global warming These amount to an average of five percent bellow 1990 level

over the five-year period 2008-2012

The protocol was initially adopted on 11 December 1997 in Japan but all of the

member countries entered into force on16 February 2005 The Kyoto Protocol

7

was adopted in Kyoto Japan on 11 December 1997 and entered into force on 16

February 2005 The detailed rules for the implementation of the Protocol were

adopted at COP 7 in Marrakesh in 2001 and are called the ldquoMarrakesh Accordsrdquo

Follow the ltKyoto Protocolgt several flexible mechanisms are allowed Such

as emissions trading the clean development mechanism (CDM) and joint

implementation The mechanisms allow AnnexⅠcounties to meet their GHG

emission limitations by purchasing GHG emission reductions credits from

elsewhere through financial exchanges projects that reduce emissions in

non-Annex Ⅰ countries or Annex Ⅰ countries with excess allowances The

mechanisms help stimulate green investment and help Parties meet their emission

targets in a cost-effective way

Therefore many countries take action on reducing the GHG discharge emission

For example increase the energy utilization efficiency develop the solar power

wind energy tidal energy and other clean energy in their industry The details

about objective of GHG emission reduction in main countries are displayed as the

following ltTable 1gt

8

ltTable 1gt Objective of CO2 reduce in main countries

Bench

mark of

Year

Objective

()

Absolute

quantity

()

Remark

EU 1990 20~30 -20~-30 Norway New Zealand 40 reducing

USA 2005 17 -3 Passed by House of Representatives

Japan 1990 25 -25 On the premise of attention with China

India

Korea 2020

(BAU) 30 mdashmdash

Discharge amount is up to 564million don

in estimation

China 2005 40~50 60~150

(2005) Each GDP

India 2005 20-25 mdashmdash With the developed countries

participation

Russia 1990 25 -25 Be neutral country

Norway 1990 30~40 -30~-40 mdashmdash

New

Zealand 1990 10~20 -10~ -20 mdashmdash

Austria 2000 5~25 -3~-11 mdashmdash

Canada 2003 20 -3 mdashmdash

Mexico 2002 50 mdashmdash With the developed countries

participation

South

Africa

2020

(BAU) 34 mdashmdash

With the developed countries

participation

Brazil 2020

(BAU) 36~39

-20

(2005) mdashmdash

(Korean Maritime Institute 20095)

9

22 The Definition of Green Port

As the global warming affecting in the world climate has been heavily changed

natural disaster frequently occurred natural resources depletion and supply

imbalance cause crisis to reach a high level For the purpose of getting away from

financial crisis and creating the new growth motivity the counties in the world

make more efforts on developing economic

Because of the realization of this global climate and environment crisis Korean

government had brought out the ldquoGreen Growth Policyrdquo And it made the ldquoGreen

Growth Policyrdquo be embodied and law-governed announced ldquoLow Carbon Green

Growth of the Basic Lawrdquo

In order to coordinate with this policy and law build up the ldquoGreen Growthrdquo

everyone make their efforts and reach ldquoGreen Growthrdquo in Korea each department

As a important industry department port authority also take activity to match the

national strategy of ldquoGreen Growthrdquo and draw up the plan on ldquoGreen Portrdquo

construction

However there isnrsquot a clear definition about the Green Port Korean Land

Transport and Maritime Ministry have explained the Green Port as follows Green

house gas Reducing Energy Effciencing Nature-friendly Port The explanation is

very easy to understand but from a professional point of view it not very

10

comprehensive and concrete So we have to understand the concept in the Green

Port Construction measures and programs There are about 4 kind explanation and

promotion programs in the Green Port Respectively the port which based on

green technology and green business creating new growth motive improving

living standards jumping in the ranks of the advanced port

ltFigure 2gt Green Port appearance and basic definition

In the Green Growth National Strategy Policy there are 10 pieces of policy

directions and 50 researches each department should choose the appropriate one

Follow these researches chose by port availability especially Low Carbon

11

Self-sufficiency Port The Disaster Safety Port Eco-friendly Port Resource

Recycling Port and in this study Green Port construction is a plan on

comprehensive and mix of 4kinds of Green Port Construction

Table 221 Four Promotions for Green Port Construction

Promotion Program

(Green Port type) Activities

Low-Carbon

Self-Sufficiency Port

Eco-friendly inland transportation system building

New renewable resources power equipment utilization

AMP LED utilization

The Disaster Safety

Port

Disaster Prevention environment infrastructure building

Disaster prediction and corresponding system utilization

Eco-Friendly Port Beauty the port by green park planting and so on

Provide eco-friendly port building programs

Resource Recycling

Port

Port waste (silt soil) effectively recycling system

Establish resource recycling port paragon

As table1 shown each type of Green Port has a separate emphasis

Eco-friendly inland transportation system which encourages utilizing rail canal

barge clean system reduces the truck application amount AMP means

Alternative Maritime Power supply system replaces with ship power generation

The Green Port construction in most of counties is the low-carbon self-sufficiency

12

port And in their construction maybe add a few other type promote director like

beauty the port by green park planting and so on

However in this study the Green Port concept is a comprehensive plan among

4 types not a specialization system

23 Green Port Construction Situation in major countries

After ltKyoto protocolgt having brought out each department began to take

affords on the reducing the GHG (greenhouse gas) emission In port department

the activities are embodied in the Green Port construction In this study many

major ports in US EU Japan and Korea are chose to explain for research

231 US

① LALB Port

In order to achieve to reduce marine pollutants standby and build clean port

LALB Port standby resource ministry and environment protection ministry

signed a 5year plan on clean standby action cooperation

This promotion business plan set a set of marine pollutants standby emission

limitation on the ship department from the statistics year 2006-2007 to 2010-2011

handling department heavy duty equipment truck department and so on Such as

13

in Green Port Technology construction department measures and programs are

shown in following Table

Table231 the details of LALB Port Green Port Promotion Programs

Promotion Program

Heavy Equipment Truck

Heavy Equipment

Replace and Update Aging Facilities

Substitute Fuels and Clean Fuel Incentives

Budgetary for the Development of Substitute Fuels

Marine Vessels Tugs

Ship Speed Reduction within the Port

Electrical supply of parking in the Berth

Use low-sulfur fuel (supplementary motor)

Handling Equipment

Air Quality Monitoring

Measure ambient air pollution levels in the vicinity of

the Port

Include a number of real-time air quality measurements

On the restrict situation of heavy equipment trucks and others vessels must to

be replaced and rebuilt in order to minimum the emission of NOx And the trucks

which donrsquot reach the regulate standard do not allowed to get in the port These

regulations will help their owner to replace and update trucks and also set up a

replacement plan to 16000 aging trucks make the replace done by 2012 As

foundation repaired the cargo owner must to pay an addition tax about 20ft 35$

40ft 79$

14

In the maritime department the speed reduction incentive took action in

Jan2005 When ship entry into the port boundary speed must be reduced under

20 miles 12kont At the beginning the effect of this plan is very clearly so the

limitation may be raised to 40mile And AMP (Alternative Maritime Power ) is

encouraged to be built and developed as to ship use their engine and get GHG

emission

② New York- New Jersey Port

The New York- New Jersey Port Authority brought out environment policy on

CO2 emission reduction The main concepts as following first reduce PX SOX

3 each year and CO2 5 Second ship must utilize sulfur-low fuel as a

obligation Third AMP is provided Forth modern the unloading and loading

equipment must be built Fifth promote trucks replacement Sixth reform the ship

engine Seventh invent 9 billion dollars in the following 10 years Eighth invent

to all hybrid equipment (325) Ninth install the hybrid truck in AMPT and

NYCT

③ Seattle Port

15

In Seattle Port Air Environment Maritime Improvement plan has been

accepted in 2005 The plan includes first set up Puget Sound Maritime Air

Forum and make one AMP provide services for two tour ships second change

the diesel hybrid equipment into electric utilization Third use bio-diesel and

diesel catalyst and reduce the emission Forth emphasize the standard and plan of

truck minimum the idling time

Seattle Port Tacoma Port and Vancouver made a assignment and promote

ldquoNorthwest Ports Clean Air Strategyrdquo

④ Auckland Port

Auckland Port set up the aging replacement plan in 2008 and invent 20 milion

dollars gas emission should reach the level And cargo transport system in port

hinterland port authority and Air environment management committee make

cooperation and give an incentive to truck which use new clean technology

Table232 Short term and Long term Green Port Plans in Auckland Port

16

17

232 EU

Rotterdam Port

As the biggest Port in EU Rotterdam Port takes more affords in reducing the

CO2 emission Main programs are low carbon footprint AMP and so on The

limitation of CO2 emission reduces down 50 of 1990 by 2025

In July 2008 the authority of Rotterdam port gave international cooperation

with other ports an extra boost by organizing the World Ports Climate Conference

During this conference the authority of Rotterdam discussed possible ways in

which ports and business could reduce air pollution and CO2 emissions The

proposals the authority of Rotterdam was set out in a declaration which was

supported by all 55 port cities attending the conference The conference resulted

in five projects to improve air quality and reduce CO2 emissions The authority of

Rotterdam is behind the project to further elaborate an Environmental Ship Index

The Rotterdam Climate Initiative is a joint venture with the municipality of

Rotterdam DCMR Environmental Protection Agency Rijnmond and Deltalinqs

Common goal is to halve CO2 emissions in the region by 2025 in comparison with

1990 levels In connection with the Rotterdam Climate Initiative the port works

on (together with DCMR and others) creating an infrastructure for the capture

18

transport and storage of CO2 A business case presented in the summer of 2008 is

now being elaborated into a business plan The business case concludes that

Rotterdam can begin in 2015 with the capture transport and underground storage

of five million tons of CO2 per annum This means that the basic infrastructure

will then be in place for further growth in capture and storage to twenty million

tons in 2025

In 2008 a start was made on the development of a sustainability index for

activities relating to the P for Planet (environment) In 2009 it will further expand

the index to cover the P for People and the P for Profit In the first phase of the

sustainability index CO2 footprint sustainable purchasing sustainable building

and sustainable land allocation will be covered

233 Japan

① Tacoma Port

In the Tacoma Port there are some programs on protecting the air water and

soil environment

In the air protection department ldquoNorthwest Ports Clean Air Strategyrdquo

ldquoGreen Gateway for Traderdquo and ldquoTruck Programrdquo had brought out to against air

pollution The concepts include using ultra-low sulfur diesel bio-diesel and other

cleaner-burning fuels in cargo-handling equipment using low-sulfur distillate

19

fuels at berth adding ldquogreen designrdquo environmental features to ships including

diesel-electric motors that save up to 30 percent in fuel and significantly reduce

emissions setting targets to change older less-efficient truck engines installing

anti-idling devices on rail-switching engines as well as partnering on other

innovative technological advance

The Port of Tacomarsquos four dockside rail yards move cargo quickly and

efficiently from container terminals They also reduce the number of trucks on

city streets and highways Each full train that leaves the Port represents 250 to 300

trucks not on our roads reducing roadway congestion and diesel emissions The

lowest emission route to ship cargo from Asia to the US Midwest is through the

Puget Sound according to the results of a study by Herbert Engineering released

in May 2009

And in the land protection program there are successful clean projects open

spaces and future habitat restoration In 2007 the Port purchased about 70 acres

of open space known as Juliarsquos Gulch and Storey Pit located between the

Tideflats and residential Northeast Tacoma Monitor water quality system is in

utilization in the water department in Tacoma Port

② Tokyo Port

In the Tokyo Port Green Port programs are almost similar with Tacoma Port

e-RTGC (Rubber Tired Gantry Crane) the barge between Tokyo and Yocohama

20

which shorten international maritime container cargo transportation land distance

super eco-shipbuilding technology dissemination and promotion green business

certification operation and shippers and logistics companies support cooperation

③ Osaka Port and Hakata Port

AMP electrical power equipment and solar power equipment are in utilization in

Osaka Port E-RTGC and solar power of refrigerated container are in utilization in

the Hakata Port

234 Korea

In Busan Port a set of Green Port took implementation such as LNG truck

E-RTGC equipment utilization eco-friendly transport means conversion (rail

canal barge) and GHG emission reduction obligation Table233

21

ltTable 233gt Summary of the Main Port of Green Port Measures

COUNTRY PORT MEASURES

US

LALB Port

Green flag AMP discharge gas reduction obligation

recommends use of alternative fuels and clean fuel

funding for the development of alternative fuels facilities

by new engine development instead of NOx emissions

green truck program (reduce70-80) low-sulfur fuel

utilization restore and revitalize the Los Cerritos

Wetlands

New York

Port

AMP modernized facilities utilization high speed hybrid

yard

Auckland

Port

Incentives on the new cleaning technology containers

transportation system

Seattle Port

AMP green ship membership Tier 4 level reducing PM

by 1994 level Smart Way program Northwest Ports

Clean Air Strategy

EU Rotterdam

Port

Clean engine (barge) green ship membership carbon

footprint calculation cruise ship which under port

authority change to use low-sulfur fuel low emission

engine development and utilization Green Award AMP

ship recycling incentives

Japan

Tokyo Port

RTGC (Rubber Tired Gantry Crane) apply for the barge

between Tokyo and Yocohama shorten international

maritime container cargo transportation land distance

super eco-shipbuilding technology dissemination and

promotion green business certification operation

shippers and logistics companies support cooperation

Osaka Port AMP electrical power equipment solar power equipment

Hakata Port E-RTGC solar power utilization in refrigerated container

Korea Busan Port

LNG truck E-RTGC eco-friendly transport means

conversion (rail canal barge) GHG emission reduction

obligation

22

24 Green Port Indicators Research

As the previous section list shown Green Port measures and programs are

substantially the same

When a ship entry in the port boundary from voyage many ports give a

incentive on shifting and utilizing sulfur-low fuel and reducing the speed under

20 miles when the ship berth in the port the alternative maritime power are

provided which replace its power generation

Next in the cargo unloading and loading department the same with above

utilization of sulfur-low fuel and electrical equipment are promoted and

eco-driving education to driver is necessary what speed is fuel fully burning and

emission minimum point

In the cargo transport department in other words truck department the

replacement on aging trucks is popular in many ports aging trucks are prohibited

close to port at the same time an incentive or support function are provided on

aging replacement The automated equipments are recommended to utilize in the

Green Port like hybrid yard tractor And a perfect plan on truck running also could

reduce the idling time and against the emission of CO2

The details reference the following Table 241

23

Table241 Green Port measures in port each department

Emission reduction programs

Ship

department

Shipping

in the

port

boundary

Obligation on the utilization of sulfur-low fuel

Reform ship engine and utilize hybrid

Speed reduce in the port entrance(a off-shore fee

incentive)

Off-shore AMP

Shift utilization system of clean fuel

Unloading and loading

department

Obligation on the utilization of sulfur-low fuel

Replace electrical equipment

Eco-driving

Truck department Hybrid yard tractor utilization

Promote aging truck replacement

Minimum the idling time

Others LED light in the Port

Develop renew and recycle resource energy

The Green Port measures in this study are e-RTGC AMP AGV Green Ship

certification system incentives on the new clean technology Green Flag(speed

reduction incentive)eco-friendly transport means conversion joint distribution

the cost on account of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction polities and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

The details and definition on each Green Port measure and the relationship with

Port Competitiveness will be expressed in next chapter

24

Chapter 3 The Relationship between Port

Competitiveness and Green Port Construction

31 Port Competitiveness Literature Review

Although past studies on port selection models have focused on port selection

made by port facilities port services port rates and charge and location

Murphy made a survey between 534 shipping companies and port authorities in

1989 and between 1850 shipping companies and port authorities in 1992

Comparing with other papers Murphys got a survey among more widely

objects In his paper port selection(port competitiveness) was seen to affected by

facilities situation appropriate pilotage max ship entrance probability the

25

capability of handling non-regular cargos whether to provide information of ship

nationality or not and port services level

In French model (1979) there are two factors affecting the port selection (port

competitiveness) endogenous factor and exogenous factor In endogenous factors

there are adequacy and physical plant condition of terminal facilities terminal rate

and charges frequency and geographic coverage of ship and freight services the

capacity of connecting to inland rails or transport net and the services provides for

the shipping or logistics And exogenous factors included the size and economic

capacity of hinterland as a source exports or market for imports national

economic situation trade policy and support established by government the

situation at home and abroad

The same as Frenchs paper in Paters paper in 1990 there are endogenous and

exogenous factors too In endogenous there are the services provides for the

shipping or logistics capacity of terminal facilities situation and condition of

facilities operation strategies established by port authority convenience to utilize

And the political situation at home and abroad social change economic factor

stabilized labor and capital However in 2004 there is a tremendous change in

Peters new paper There are four parts multi-modal process interface transport

modes infrastructure Multi-model Process part includes ship entrance rapid

speed and accuracy shipper and shipping companies reactive operation flexibility

Interface includes labor power information technology and so on And there are

26

ship calls frequency and amount of fleet factors in the transport modes part In the

infrastructure part includes port facility equipments and so on

Port facilities rates and charges services inland situation and social

circumstance factors affect the port selection and competitiveness a lot from the

research until 1992 by Murphy And in Lirn and Pater research 2003-2004 the

new and detail factors are shown to us

We can clearly see the contents in next table

27

Table 311 Prevention literature research results

Influence factors

French

(1979)

Endogenous

port facilities port rate and charges calls frequency port services

port connection with inland

Exogenous

economic size of hinterland national economic situation trade

policy home and abroad situation

Willingale

(1982)

voyage distance economy size entrance to port and route port

facilities max ship entrance probability port operation rates and

charges port authority scale of port

Slack

(1985)

cost of inland transportation port proximity ship demurrage

multi-transport

Peter

(1990)

Endogenous

port facilities condition of facilities operation strategies

convenience to utilize

Exogenous

political situation social change economic factor stabilized labor

and capital

UNCTAD

(1992)

port facilities services location level of financial industry

information communication system social circumstances economic

stability

Murphy

(1992)

facilities situation appropriate pilotage max ship entrance

probability the capability of handling non-regular cargos whether to

provide information of ship nationality or not port services level

Lirn

(2003-2004)

physical and technologic facilities geopolitical location port

operation and management shipping and terminal cost

Peter

(2004)

Multi-modal Process

ship entrance rapid speed and accuracy shipper and shipping

companies reactive operation flexibility

Interface labor and capital

Transport modes ship calls frequency and amount of fleet factors

28

And there are many experts and scholars research for the influence factors to

port selection and competitiveness in Korea The specific content follows table5

Table 312 Literature research in Korean academia

Influence factors

Jeon Il-su (1992) location facilities charges service level (EDI) terminal operation

port authority

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

( 1993 )

location facilities throughput charges service operation

situation

Kim Hak-so

(1993)

export shipping amount of annual cost of each ton of cargo

marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km of

cargo loading time

import marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km

of cargo amount of liner ship

Yeo Gi-tae (1996) location facilities throughput charge service operation situation

Ha Dong-u amp

Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

location facilities service level logistics charges environment of

logistics service

Yeo Gi-tae (1999) location facilities throughput charges service

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

throughput quay length yard area GNP

Kum Jong-su

(2001)

distance between port and cargo site terminal facilities service

the capacity of multi-transport capacity of cargo handling

administrative service rates and charges of inland transport

congestion

Yeo Gi-tae (2002) location throughput facilities service level

Kim Jin-gu (2002) port facilities location cargo amount rates and charges services

29

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005)

voyage degree to attract cargo cargo handling cost amount of

handling cargo connection to inland service reliability location

berth availability quay length feeder network depth

transshipment volumes cargo security profitability

offing degree to attract cargo berth availability cargo handling

cost transshipment volumes

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005)

cargo handling amount port facilities location rates and charges

level of service

Heo Yun-su

(2005)

port facilities rates and charges services marketing geopolitics

location economic and social circumstance

Kim Geun-seop

(2007)

port services facilities cargo handling amount location cost

productivity factor global factor

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) rates and charges services port characteristics

Many experts and scholars make a research on port selection and

competitiveness recently But the factors selection criteria are difference

Nevertheless the main factors are facilities services cost and so on

Therefore port competitiveness factors which chose in this study are port

facilities port services port rates and charges and social circumstance

However the main factors are not the whole factors any more more and more

detail factors and characteristic factors appearance Port selection and

competitiveness factors have changed And the development content is introduced

in next part

30

32 Port Competitiveness Development Tree

As mentioned above port facilities port rates and charges and port location are

the basic factors in the port selection and competitiveness

From the following table we can discover that first one facilities rates and

charges and location are the most important factor in port selection and

competitiveness second one the importance of social circumstance turns larger

inland connection is necessary all the time

Table 321 Main factor in the Pretentious Research

31

port facilities rates and

charges

inland

connection

social

circumstance location

French (1979) radic radic radic

Wiliingale (1982) radic radic

Slack (1985) radic

Pater (1990) radic radic

UNCTAD (1992) radic radic radic

Murphy(1992) radic

Jeon Il-su (1992) radic radic radic

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

(1993)

radic radic radic

Kim Hak-so

(1993) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1996) radic radic radic

Ha Dong-u

amp Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1998) radic radic radic

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

radic

Kum Jong-su

(2001) radic radic radic radic

Kim Jin-gu(2002) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(2002) radic radic

Lirn(2003-2004) radic radic radic

Pater(2004) radic

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005) radic radic radic

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005) radic radic radic

Heo Yun-su

(2005) radic radic radic radic

Kim Geun-seop

(2007) radic radic radic radic

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) radic

32

33 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green

Port Construction

Following the research above Port facilities rates and charges inland

connection and social circumstance are chose in this study port selection and

competitiveness department

e-RTGC Electric rubber tired gantry crane is a mobile gantry crane used for

stacking intermodal containers within the stacking areas of a container terminal

e-RTGC are used at container terminals and container storage yards to straddling

multiple lanes of railroad and container storage or when maximum storage

density in the container stack is desired

AMP is shorted for Alternative Marine Power and Itrsquos a facility which

provides the electric system in the land for ship which entry in the port The

facility can reduce emissions which ship get entrance in the port

AGV is a mobile robot that follows markers or wires in the floor or uses

vision or lasers They are most often used in industrial applications to move

materials around a manufacturing facility or a warehouse Automatic Guided

Vehicle systems work around-the-clock making continuous flow and just-in-time

delivery easier to achieve Application of the automatic guided vehicle has broade

33

ned during the late 20th century and they are no longer restricted to industrial

environments

The e-RTGC AMP and AGV are the new clean facilities and equipments in the

Green Port they donrsquot reduce the efficiency of handling cargo and they also

reduce the CO2 emission account

Green ship certification system if a ship utilizes clean and CO2 emission

reduction technology on the ship building adds equipment and management and

son on certification would be received And the port authority gives some

incentive and preferential treatment among 45 ports Such as a better schedule is

provided for green membership ship priority in handing cargo and discount on

entrance fee

Incentives on the new cleaning technology There are two expressions about

this measure one is that the port authority give a incentive to ship which have a

great utilization on the new cleaning technology and the other one is that

environment provide many incentives to the authority which utilize the new

cleaning technology in the port such as LED street lamp solar power cranes

Green flag The Green Flag incentive program was set up to encourage ships to

slow down in order to improve air quality The Green Flag program provides

approximately $2 million a year in discounts for vessel operators who slow their

ships to 12 knots (22kmh) or less within 20miles (32km) of the harbor

34

According to the Port the Green Flag program reduced air pollution by 600tons in

2007 and is expected to do better in 2008

All of Green ship certification system incentives on the new cleaning

technology and Green Flag are incentives provided for users of port and aimed at

reduce port rates and charges So the 3 measures belong to affect port rates and

charges

Eco-friendly transport means conversion Eco-friendly means of transport are

much accounted of green port for example railway discharge less GHG emission

than truck barge with a clean engine among the river and inshore canal

Joint distribution joint distribution is a collaborative system which port

provides among many logistics companies It can make the cargo handling speed

rapidly and reduce cargo storage time for CO2 emission reducing such as

refrigerated container In an addition it also makes the logistics companies

transport more efficient

Cost on amount of CO2 emission differenced from other port the cost on

amount of CO2 is included in the port cost The cost aims to reduce the CO2

emission directly

CO2 emission reduction policies compared with other traditional port Green

Port gives more cost discount and incentives but in an addition there are many

policies on CO2 emission restriction Such as aging trucks restrictions in inland

transport department ship entry speed reduced and fuel changed in the ship

35

department and so on Whether these restriction policies constrain port

development or not and the degree of these policies constrain port development

will be explain by the AHP results

Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors some ports in the

western countries are opened as a travel place for visitors so as to change the

polluted impress and raise the position in our heart

Cost on amount of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction policies and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors can affect the social

circumstance factor Whether these measures can or not improve the social

circumstance and port competitiveness we have to see the next calculation and

results

36

Chapter 4 The Green Port Competitiveness

Analysis

41 The Green Port Competitiveness Model by AHP

The AHP is one multi-criteria decision making method which has been

extensively applied to a variety of decision-making situations The multi-criteria

techniques are considered to be a promising framework for evaluation of

decision-making factors since they have the potential to take into account

conflicting multidimensional incommensurable and uncertain effects of

decisions explicitly

In order to apply the AHP method a hierarchical decision schema was

constructed by decomposing the decision problem into its decision elements

37

After that the importance or preferences of the decision elements are examined in

a pair-wise comparison to the elements in the hierarchy The parameters are

estimated using pair-wise comparisons between the importance of the attribute or

decision element in the function using data made by each responder Making

comparisons is a question of which of the two attributes is more import as well as

how much more important

Follow these theories the Green Port Competitiveness Model choose factors as

follow in port competitiveness factors part there are port facilities port rates and

charges inland connection social circumstance in Green Port construction part

there are e-RTGC AMP AGV green ship certification system green flag

incentives on the new cleaning technology eco-friendly transport means

conversion joint distribution CO2 emission reduction policies cost on amount of

CO2 emission beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

38

Figure 41 Green Port Competitiveness AHP model

Follow the Green Port Competitiveness AHP as shown we set a questionnaire

survey to many experts scholars working in logistics system area And we got 15

ones and 14 ones results are believable and integrated

42 Green Port Competitiveness Analysis

39

The key to construction of the factors which affects the port competitiveness

is to determine the conceptual model The selection of the factors directly affects

the evaluation of the result In order to ensure the accuracy objectivity and

practicality of evaluation results the following basic principles must be followed

when selecting factors systematic principles the principle of universal

comparability practical principle and goal-oriented principle In view of the

foregoing the competitiveness which affected by Green Port construction model

is made The analysis follows established principles of port competitiveness

evaluation taking into account the characteristics and functions of the port as well

as port facilities port services port rates and charges ship entrance inland

connection social circumstances and so on

(1) Port facilities

e-RTGC U11 AMP U12 AGV U13

(2) Port rates and charges

Green ship certification system U21 Incentives on the new clean

technology U22 Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

(3) Inland connection

Eco-friendly means of transport U31 Joint distribution U32

(4) Social circumstances

40

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41 CO2 emission reduction policies

U42 Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors U43

Table 421 Details of Level I and Level II values

Level I

indicators Symbol Level II indicators Symbol

Port facilities A1

e-RTGC U11

AMP U12

AGV U13

Port rates and

charges A2

Green ship certification system U21

Incentives on the new clean technology U22

Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

Inland

connection A3

Eco-friendly means of transport U31

Joint distribution U32

Social

circumstances A4

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41

CO2 emissions reduction policies U42

Beautiful environment construction in inner

harbors U43

41

I Determination of level I indicator weights

As the ports competitiveness evaluation indicators at this level are complex

and the elements are not easily quantified AHP is adopted to determine the

indicator weights with the basic steps as follows

(1) Establish a comparative judgment matrix The comparative judgment

matrix is obtained through comparing contributed proportion of multiple

indicators to the overall target by the judgment scale wherein the fuzzy

judgment number introduced is 1 3 5 7 and 9 and the reciprocal of

such number indicates the important degree of one element relatively to

another The results are shown in next table

Table 422 Comparison matrix of level I indicators

A1 A2 A3 A4

A1 1 15 13 3

A2 5 1 3 7

A3 3 13 1 5

A4 13 17 15 1

(2) Calculate the characteristic vector of the comparative judgment matrix

which refers to the weighted vector of the indicator The writer adopts

42

the geometric method to calculate the characteristic vector The

calculated result is as follows

ω=(012 0560 026 006)T λmax=418 It can be obtained from the table

RI=09 Wherein ω is the characteristic vector corresponding to the

maximum characteristic value λmax of the comparative judgment matrix

namely the weighted vector of the indicator RI is the average

consistency indicator as shown in following table

Table423 Average random consistency indicator RI

Matrix Order

RI

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

0 0 058 09 112 124 132 141

Matrix Order

RI

9 10 11 12 13 14 15

145 149 152 154 156 158 159

(3) Conduct consistency check on the comparative judgment matrix Adopt

the random consistency proportion CR to judge the consistency of the

comparative judgment matrix According to CI= (λmax -n)(n-1) and

CR=CIRI it can be obtained through calculation CR=007lt01 Thus

this comparative judgment matrix has a satisfactory consistency and the

indicator weight coefficient calculated through this matrix is acceptable

43

II Determination of level II indicator weights

The data at this level are the details of level Ⅰ indicator The judgment

matrix obtained through comparing multiple sub-indicators under Level Ⅰ

indicators is adopted to determine the weights of sub-indicators under each

indicator one by one The specific steps are as follows

(1) The experts score the weights within the given range To determine the

weights of several small indicators under the same big indicator it is

supposed that the score of small indicator ｋ under the indicator j made

by the expert i is Xijk wherein i=12n n is the total number of

experts ј=12m m is the total number of LevelⅡ indicator к

=12Oj Oj is the number of small indicators under the big indicator ј

іјк IJK LRC l I j k

(2) The credit rating of the expert і is l l =1 2 3 l =1 indicates this expert

is quite familiar with the evaluated contents l =2 indicator this expert is

44

with the evaluated contents l =3 indicates this expert is not quite familiar

with the evaluated contents yi1 is the=08 yi2 =05 and yi3=1

(3) The comprehensive evaluation score of small indicator l under the

indicator j is as follows

(4) The formula for normalization processing of indicator weights is as

follows and the absolute weight of the indicator set is marked as

q=(q1q2q11)

(5) Because of the same justification and principle we donrsquot give the detail

about the calculation The same with the level Ⅰ calculation we

manipulation data one by one and get 14 results And obtain the average

45

results by weighted average method The results detail as Table for the

final weights of Level-Ⅱ evaluation indicators

Above the calculation process and method are just one of data from the

questionable surveys In this study the final results are got from the

weighted average by the results of each questionable survey

The final results are shown as Table424

Table424 Indicator weights table of indicator system

Level I

indicators Weight LevelⅡ indicators

Relative

weight

Absolute

weight

Importance

percentage

Port Facilities

A1 02735

e-RTGC U11 05506 01506 1506

AMP U12 01648 00451 451

AGV U13 02826 00773 773

Port Rates and

Charges A2

02902

Green ship certification s

ystem U21 04724 01371 1371

Incentives on the new

clean technology U22 02871 00833 833

Green Flag (speed

reduction incentive)U23 02405 00698 698

Inland

connection A3

02865

Eco-friendly means of

transport U31 05942 01702 1702

Joint distribution U32 04058 01163 1163

Social

environmentA4 00863

Cost on amount of CO2

emission U41 03698 00319 319

CO2 emissions reduction

policies U42 02273 00196 196

Beautiful environment

construction in inner

harbors U43

04029 00348 348

46

III Case study

In the questionable survey we also got the mark of Green Port measures

evaluation value of many main ports such as Singapore Port Shanghai Port

Hongkong Port Busan Port LALB Port Rotterdam Port and Yocohama Port

The highest mark is 5 and lowest one is 1

Table425 Evaluation value of many main ports

Singapore

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

LALB

Port

Rotterdam

Port

Yocohama

Port

Port facilities 38000 36000 34000 38182 38000 42000 32000

Port rates and

charges 32000 36000 31000 35455 32000 39000 33000

Inland

connection 39000 34545 35000 29091 35000 45000 36000

Social

circumstance 42000 32727 41000 32000 38000 42727 36000

With the Green Port and Port competitiveness indicator weights results these

ports got the final evaluation value

47

Table426 Final evaluation value on main ports Green Port measures and

competitiveness

Rotterdam

Port

Singapore

Port

LALB

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

Yocohama

Port

394 345 330 330 319 318 317

43 Results Analysis

From the results table we can obtain the many results as following

① The main Green Port measures which are more important to improve port

competitiveness are Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system the indicator weights are 01702 01506 and

01371 among the 11 indicators

② In the Green Port construction Cost on amount of CO2 emission and CO2

emissions reduction policies are the restrictions indicators but the weight

of two indicators are not big 00319 and 00196 So effect on Green Port

construction to port competitiveness does have the weaken capacity but

not clearly strengthen more clearly Thus Green Port construction really

could improve the port competitiveness

48

③ In the case study traditional ports Rotterdam and Singapore Port give us

better examples on Green Port construction especially Rotterdam Port

④ Hongkong Busan and Yocohama Port all got a lower evaluation value

But in detail Hongkong and Yocohama Port got a lower on the port

facilities and rates and charges Busan Port got a higher on the port

facilities and rates and charges but a lower on the inland connection and

social circumstance

⑤ Shanghai Port doesnrsquot have Particular strength factors but the

comprehensive strength is not bad the same as LALB Port

49

Chapter 5 Conclusion

In this thesis the effects of Green Port construction for improving the port

competitiveness have been studied Under the definition of Green Port the

characteristics of Green Port and its effects has been shown by analysing the AHP

method which based on the questionary survey for Green Port specialists and port

officers

Follow the results of analysis on Green Port competitiveness AHP model

Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green ship certification system is

better for Green Port Construction welcome for shipping companies and citizens

who live around the port And in the analysis of Port competitiveness factors port

rates and charges always affects port competitiveness a lot As a trend inland

connection factor abstracts more attention of shipping companies

50

On the trend of port department each port should take a activity to adjust

strategy for improving its competitiveness Such as in the main ports evaluation

Busan port get a high value on port rates and charges and port facilities but as a

lower value on inland connection factor the final value is not as well as we look

forward In the evaluation of Singapore Port through it gets a lower value on rates

and charges higher value on inland connection and social circumstance causes the

final value are better So the Green Port Construction may be a trend in port

department

In the results of this thesis Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system are better solutions for Green Port Construction And

especially it can be verified that the port rates and charges always affects port

competitiveness Futhermore the investment for Green Port construction and its

effects have to be verified in the future

51

References

1 Hoyle B S and Smith J 1992 Transport and Development In Modern

transport geography edited by B S Hoyle R D Knowles (London Belhaven

Press)pp11-31

2 Beresford A K C De Souza A J R G and Pettit S J 2005 Stategic

development of liner shipping companies and terminal operators Ocean yearbook

19(Chicago 1L The University of Chicago Press) pp 732-750

3 Heaver T D 2002 Supply chain and logistics management implications for

liner shipping In The handbook of maritime economics and business edited by C

Grammenos (LondonLLP) pp 375-396

4 Park T E (2011) A Study on selection criteria of Green Port and evaluation of

major Korean port A masters thesis of graduate school of Incheon university

52

5 JeongBH (2009)Green port management policy directions in the green

growth era- The case of Gwangyang port in Republic of Korea Journal of Korea

Port Economic Association Vol25(3) p361-384

6 Lee J S Han N H(2009) A study on Green Port Revitalization According to

Air Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

7 Lee Y K Nan J W(2010)Green Logistics Policy Analysis and Implications

of Japan

8 Lee B S (2010)Tendency and Countermeasures on Green Logistics in Port

Logistics Company A masters thesis of graduate school of Korean Maritime

university

9 Lee J S (2009) A Study on Green Port Revitalization According to Air

Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

10 Zhang F Y Li Z Lu X J Yao X L(2008)Competitiveness of Inland

Ports Based on F-AHP

11 Port of Long Beach (2009) Green Port Policy wwwpolbcom

12 The port of Los Angeles wwwportoflosangelesorg

XII

43 Results Analysis 47

Chapter 5 Conclusion 49

References 51

1

Chapter 1 Introduction

11 Research background and objective

The Kyoto Protocol is an international agreement linked to the United Nations

Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) The major feature of the

Kyoto Protocol is that it sets binding targets for 37 industrialized countries and the

European community for reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to fight

global warming These amounts will be lower an average of five per cent based on

1990 levels over the five-year period 2008-2012 The protocol was initially

adopted on 11 December 1997 in Japan but entered into force on 16 February

2005 As of July 2010 191 countries and states have signed and ratified the

protocol

2

After ltKyoto Protocolgt has brought out in 1997 more and more people put

their attention on environment pollution Rapid development in industry

department brings out air water soil noise and wildlife pollution and destruction

As the health development of economic alleviating environmental pollution and

restoring original ecology extremely necessary

Focus on the long-term and future development in the port many counties

government and ports authorities pay attentions on Green Port construction

In the short term C40 World Ports Climate Conference draws up some

adaptive plans among big cities and major ports The plans include the incentives

provided to green ship user cooperation among the C40 member ports

encouragement to develop and utilize the Alternative Maritime Power and so on

In EU Green Port major policies is prohibition the ship utilization on fuel

which sulfur content over 2 (after Jun2010 the limitation of sulfur content is

1) There are also Marco Polo I and Marco Polo II plans in EU In Marco Polo I

Modal Shift Action Catalyst Action and Common Learning Action are included

from 2003 to 2006 And after 2007 in Marco II Motorways of the Sea Action

Traffic Avoidance Actions and Rail Synergy are added

In US people pay more attention to developing the new technology for

reducing CO2 emission Such as power generator and renewable resources and

Northwest Ports Clean Air Strategy

3

Compared with other departments green policy in port department is explained

as green maritime and green shipping For example super-eco ship building and

Modal Shift promotion

The same aim to Hong Kong Ports AMP E-RTG hybrid truck bio-diesel

recycling energy CNG LNG and development are in utilization

ldquoGreen Growth Policyrdquo is the measure which brought out by the Korean

government Follow this strategy Korean port authority also takes out the ldquoGreen

Port building comprehensive planrdquo Furthermore low carbon self-sufficiency port

the disaster safety port eco-friendly port and resource recycling port are the

understandings on the Korean ldquoGreen Growth Policyrdquo

As the port support policies being changed port competitiveness factors are

changed Especially the importance degree of each factor has been changed a

lot The purpose of this study is explaining the competitiveness effects changed

which taking Green Port measures and programs port and give a better advice and

suggestion to Green Port construction

12 Scope and structure of research

The method to analysis the effects of Green Port construction for improving

port competitiveness is AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process)

4

And research process in this study is shown in ltFigure 1gt

ltFigure 1gt Research process

In chapter 1 research background and objective research method and process

are included And chapter 2 introduces the Green Port construction background

definition the Green Port construction situation in many countries and each

department introduction in Green Port construction The chapter 3 views the

literature on port competitiveness and obtains the influence factors used in this

study trend and relationship between port competitiveness The chapter 4 based

5

on the survey data and calculates each indicator importance degree by AHP

method and analysis the result Finally in chapter 5 the conclusion summary the

whole study by the result analysis

6

Chapter 2 Green Port Construction Situation

21 Green Port Construction Background

As the United Nations Secretary General has said the greatest challenge which

we are facing is environmental regulators It is a growing crisis with economic

health and safety food production security and other dimensions

The Kyoto Protocol is an international agreement linked to the United Nations

Framework Convention on Climate Change The major feature of the Kyoto

Protocol is that it sets binding targets for 37 industrialized countries and the

European community for reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to fight

global warming These amount to an average of five percent bellow 1990 level

over the five-year period 2008-2012

The protocol was initially adopted on 11 December 1997 in Japan but all of the

member countries entered into force on16 February 2005 The Kyoto Protocol

7

was adopted in Kyoto Japan on 11 December 1997 and entered into force on 16

February 2005 The detailed rules for the implementation of the Protocol were

adopted at COP 7 in Marrakesh in 2001 and are called the ldquoMarrakesh Accordsrdquo

Follow the ltKyoto Protocolgt several flexible mechanisms are allowed Such

as emissions trading the clean development mechanism (CDM) and joint

implementation The mechanisms allow AnnexⅠcounties to meet their GHG

emission limitations by purchasing GHG emission reductions credits from

elsewhere through financial exchanges projects that reduce emissions in

non-Annex Ⅰ countries or Annex Ⅰ countries with excess allowances The

mechanisms help stimulate green investment and help Parties meet their emission

targets in a cost-effective way

Therefore many countries take action on reducing the GHG discharge emission

For example increase the energy utilization efficiency develop the solar power

wind energy tidal energy and other clean energy in their industry The details

about objective of GHG emission reduction in main countries are displayed as the

following ltTable 1gt

8

ltTable 1gt Objective of CO2 reduce in main countries

Bench

mark of

Year

Objective

()

Absolute

quantity

()

Remark

EU 1990 20~30 -20~-30 Norway New Zealand 40 reducing

USA 2005 17 -3 Passed by House of Representatives

Japan 1990 25 -25 On the premise of attention with China

India

Korea 2020

(BAU) 30 mdashmdash

Discharge amount is up to 564million don

in estimation

China 2005 40~50 60~150

(2005) Each GDP

India 2005 20-25 mdashmdash With the developed countries

participation

Russia 1990 25 -25 Be neutral country

Norway 1990 30~40 -30~-40 mdashmdash

New

Zealand 1990 10~20 -10~ -20 mdashmdash

Austria 2000 5~25 -3~-11 mdashmdash

Canada 2003 20 -3 mdashmdash

Mexico 2002 50 mdashmdash With the developed countries

participation

South

Africa

2020

(BAU) 34 mdashmdash

With the developed countries

participation

Brazil 2020

(BAU) 36~39

-20

(2005) mdashmdash

(Korean Maritime Institute 20095)

9

22 The Definition of Green Port

As the global warming affecting in the world climate has been heavily changed

natural disaster frequently occurred natural resources depletion and supply

imbalance cause crisis to reach a high level For the purpose of getting away from

financial crisis and creating the new growth motivity the counties in the world

make more efforts on developing economic

Because of the realization of this global climate and environment crisis Korean

government had brought out the ldquoGreen Growth Policyrdquo And it made the ldquoGreen

Growth Policyrdquo be embodied and law-governed announced ldquoLow Carbon Green

Growth of the Basic Lawrdquo

In order to coordinate with this policy and law build up the ldquoGreen Growthrdquo

everyone make their efforts and reach ldquoGreen Growthrdquo in Korea each department

As a important industry department port authority also take activity to match the

national strategy of ldquoGreen Growthrdquo and draw up the plan on ldquoGreen Portrdquo

construction

However there isnrsquot a clear definition about the Green Port Korean Land

Transport and Maritime Ministry have explained the Green Port as follows Green

house gas Reducing Energy Effciencing Nature-friendly Port The explanation is

very easy to understand but from a professional point of view it not very

10

comprehensive and concrete So we have to understand the concept in the Green

Port Construction measures and programs There are about 4 kind explanation and

promotion programs in the Green Port Respectively the port which based on

green technology and green business creating new growth motive improving

living standards jumping in the ranks of the advanced port

ltFigure 2gt Green Port appearance and basic definition

In the Green Growth National Strategy Policy there are 10 pieces of policy

directions and 50 researches each department should choose the appropriate one

Follow these researches chose by port availability especially Low Carbon

11

Self-sufficiency Port The Disaster Safety Port Eco-friendly Port Resource

Recycling Port and in this study Green Port construction is a plan on

comprehensive and mix of 4kinds of Green Port Construction

Table 221 Four Promotions for Green Port Construction

Promotion Program

(Green Port type) Activities

Low-Carbon

Self-Sufficiency Port

Eco-friendly inland transportation system building

New renewable resources power equipment utilization

AMP LED utilization

The Disaster Safety

Port

Disaster Prevention environment infrastructure building

Disaster prediction and corresponding system utilization

Eco-Friendly Port Beauty the port by green park planting and so on

Provide eco-friendly port building programs

Resource Recycling

Port

Port waste (silt soil) effectively recycling system

Establish resource recycling port paragon

As table1 shown each type of Green Port has a separate emphasis

Eco-friendly inland transportation system which encourages utilizing rail canal

barge clean system reduces the truck application amount AMP means

Alternative Maritime Power supply system replaces with ship power generation

The Green Port construction in most of counties is the low-carbon self-sufficiency

12

port And in their construction maybe add a few other type promote director like

beauty the port by green park planting and so on

However in this study the Green Port concept is a comprehensive plan among

4 types not a specialization system

23 Green Port Construction Situation in major countries

After ltKyoto protocolgt having brought out each department began to take

affords on the reducing the GHG (greenhouse gas) emission In port department

the activities are embodied in the Green Port construction In this study many

major ports in US EU Japan and Korea are chose to explain for research

231 US

① LALB Port

In order to achieve to reduce marine pollutants standby and build clean port

LALB Port standby resource ministry and environment protection ministry

signed a 5year plan on clean standby action cooperation

This promotion business plan set a set of marine pollutants standby emission

limitation on the ship department from the statistics year 2006-2007 to 2010-2011

handling department heavy duty equipment truck department and so on Such as

13

in Green Port Technology construction department measures and programs are

shown in following Table

Table231 the details of LALB Port Green Port Promotion Programs

Promotion Program

Heavy Equipment Truck

Heavy Equipment

Replace and Update Aging Facilities

Substitute Fuels and Clean Fuel Incentives

Budgetary for the Development of Substitute Fuels

Marine Vessels Tugs

Ship Speed Reduction within the Port

Electrical supply of parking in the Berth

Use low-sulfur fuel (supplementary motor)

Handling Equipment

Air Quality Monitoring

Measure ambient air pollution levels in the vicinity of

the Port

Include a number of real-time air quality measurements

On the restrict situation of heavy equipment trucks and others vessels must to

be replaced and rebuilt in order to minimum the emission of NOx And the trucks

which donrsquot reach the regulate standard do not allowed to get in the port These

regulations will help their owner to replace and update trucks and also set up a

replacement plan to 16000 aging trucks make the replace done by 2012 As

foundation repaired the cargo owner must to pay an addition tax about 20ft 35$

40ft 79$

14

In the maritime department the speed reduction incentive took action in

Jan2005 When ship entry into the port boundary speed must be reduced under

20 miles 12kont At the beginning the effect of this plan is very clearly so the

limitation may be raised to 40mile And AMP (Alternative Maritime Power ) is

encouraged to be built and developed as to ship use their engine and get GHG

emission

② New York- New Jersey Port

The New York- New Jersey Port Authority brought out environment policy on

CO2 emission reduction The main concepts as following first reduce PX SOX

3 each year and CO2 5 Second ship must utilize sulfur-low fuel as a

obligation Third AMP is provided Forth modern the unloading and loading

equipment must be built Fifth promote trucks replacement Sixth reform the ship

engine Seventh invent 9 billion dollars in the following 10 years Eighth invent

to all hybrid equipment (325) Ninth install the hybrid truck in AMPT and

NYCT

③ Seattle Port

15

In Seattle Port Air Environment Maritime Improvement plan has been

accepted in 2005 The plan includes first set up Puget Sound Maritime Air

Forum and make one AMP provide services for two tour ships second change

the diesel hybrid equipment into electric utilization Third use bio-diesel and

diesel catalyst and reduce the emission Forth emphasize the standard and plan of

truck minimum the idling time

Seattle Port Tacoma Port and Vancouver made a assignment and promote

ldquoNorthwest Ports Clean Air Strategyrdquo

④ Auckland Port

Auckland Port set up the aging replacement plan in 2008 and invent 20 milion

dollars gas emission should reach the level And cargo transport system in port

hinterland port authority and Air environment management committee make

cooperation and give an incentive to truck which use new clean technology

Table232 Short term and Long term Green Port Plans in Auckland Port

16

17

232 EU

Rotterdam Port

As the biggest Port in EU Rotterdam Port takes more affords in reducing the

CO2 emission Main programs are low carbon footprint AMP and so on The

limitation of CO2 emission reduces down 50 of 1990 by 2025

In July 2008 the authority of Rotterdam port gave international cooperation

with other ports an extra boost by organizing the World Ports Climate Conference

During this conference the authority of Rotterdam discussed possible ways in

which ports and business could reduce air pollution and CO2 emissions The

proposals the authority of Rotterdam was set out in a declaration which was

supported by all 55 port cities attending the conference The conference resulted

in five projects to improve air quality and reduce CO2 emissions The authority of

Rotterdam is behind the project to further elaborate an Environmental Ship Index

The Rotterdam Climate Initiative is a joint venture with the municipality of

Rotterdam DCMR Environmental Protection Agency Rijnmond and Deltalinqs

Common goal is to halve CO2 emissions in the region by 2025 in comparison with

1990 levels In connection with the Rotterdam Climate Initiative the port works

on (together with DCMR and others) creating an infrastructure for the capture

18

transport and storage of CO2 A business case presented in the summer of 2008 is

now being elaborated into a business plan The business case concludes that

Rotterdam can begin in 2015 with the capture transport and underground storage

of five million tons of CO2 per annum This means that the basic infrastructure

will then be in place for further growth in capture and storage to twenty million

tons in 2025

In 2008 a start was made on the development of a sustainability index for

activities relating to the P for Planet (environment) In 2009 it will further expand

the index to cover the P for People and the P for Profit In the first phase of the

sustainability index CO2 footprint sustainable purchasing sustainable building

and sustainable land allocation will be covered

233 Japan

① Tacoma Port

In the Tacoma Port there are some programs on protecting the air water and

soil environment

In the air protection department ldquoNorthwest Ports Clean Air Strategyrdquo

ldquoGreen Gateway for Traderdquo and ldquoTruck Programrdquo had brought out to against air

pollution The concepts include using ultra-low sulfur diesel bio-diesel and other

cleaner-burning fuels in cargo-handling equipment using low-sulfur distillate

19

fuels at berth adding ldquogreen designrdquo environmental features to ships including

diesel-electric motors that save up to 30 percent in fuel and significantly reduce

emissions setting targets to change older less-efficient truck engines installing

anti-idling devices on rail-switching engines as well as partnering on other

innovative technological advance

The Port of Tacomarsquos four dockside rail yards move cargo quickly and

efficiently from container terminals They also reduce the number of trucks on

city streets and highways Each full train that leaves the Port represents 250 to 300

trucks not on our roads reducing roadway congestion and diesel emissions The

lowest emission route to ship cargo from Asia to the US Midwest is through the

Puget Sound according to the results of a study by Herbert Engineering released

in May 2009

And in the land protection program there are successful clean projects open

spaces and future habitat restoration In 2007 the Port purchased about 70 acres

of open space known as Juliarsquos Gulch and Storey Pit located between the

Tideflats and residential Northeast Tacoma Monitor water quality system is in

utilization in the water department in Tacoma Port

② Tokyo Port

In the Tokyo Port Green Port programs are almost similar with Tacoma Port

e-RTGC (Rubber Tired Gantry Crane) the barge between Tokyo and Yocohama

20

which shorten international maritime container cargo transportation land distance

super eco-shipbuilding technology dissemination and promotion green business

certification operation and shippers and logistics companies support cooperation

③ Osaka Port and Hakata Port

AMP electrical power equipment and solar power equipment are in utilization in

Osaka Port E-RTGC and solar power of refrigerated container are in utilization in

the Hakata Port

234 Korea

In Busan Port a set of Green Port took implementation such as LNG truck

E-RTGC equipment utilization eco-friendly transport means conversion (rail

canal barge) and GHG emission reduction obligation Table233

21

ltTable 233gt Summary of the Main Port of Green Port Measures

COUNTRY PORT MEASURES

US

LALB Port

Green flag AMP discharge gas reduction obligation

recommends use of alternative fuels and clean fuel

funding for the development of alternative fuels facilities

by new engine development instead of NOx emissions

green truck program (reduce70-80) low-sulfur fuel

utilization restore and revitalize the Los Cerritos

Wetlands

New York

Port

AMP modernized facilities utilization high speed hybrid

yard

Auckland

Port

Incentives on the new cleaning technology containers

transportation system

Seattle Port

AMP green ship membership Tier 4 level reducing PM

by 1994 level Smart Way program Northwest Ports

Clean Air Strategy

EU Rotterdam

Port

Clean engine (barge) green ship membership carbon

footprint calculation cruise ship which under port

authority change to use low-sulfur fuel low emission

engine development and utilization Green Award AMP

ship recycling incentives

Japan

Tokyo Port

RTGC (Rubber Tired Gantry Crane) apply for the barge

between Tokyo and Yocohama shorten international

maritime container cargo transportation land distance

super eco-shipbuilding technology dissemination and

promotion green business certification operation

shippers and logistics companies support cooperation

Osaka Port AMP electrical power equipment solar power equipment

Hakata Port E-RTGC solar power utilization in refrigerated container

Korea Busan Port

LNG truck E-RTGC eco-friendly transport means

conversion (rail canal barge) GHG emission reduction

obligation

22

24 Green Port Indicators Research

As the previous section list shown Green Port measures and programs are

substantially the same

When a ship entry in the port boundary from voyage many ports give a

incentive on shifting and utilizing sulfur-low fuel and reducing the speed under

20 miles when the ship berth in the port the alternative maritime power are

provided which replace its power generation

Next in the cargo unloading and loading department the same with above

utilization of sulfur-low fuel and electrical equipment are promoted and

eco-driving education to driver is necessary what speed is fuel fully burning and

emission minimum point

In the cargo transport department in other words truck department the

replacement on aging trucks is popular in many ports aging trucks are prohibited

close to port at the same time an incentive or support function are provided on

aging replacement The automated equipments are recommended to utilize in the

Green Port like hybrid yard tractor And a perfect plan on truck running also could

reduce the idling time and against the emission of CO2

The details reference the following Table 241

23

Table241 Green Port measures in port each department

Emission reduction programs

Ship

department

Shipping

in the

port

boundary

Obligation on the utilization of sulfur-low fuel

Reform ship engine and utilize hybrid

Speed reduce in the port entrance(a off-shore fee

incentive)

Off-shore AMP

Shift utilization system of clean fuel

Unloading and loading

department

Obligation on the utilization of sulfur-low fuel

Replace electrical equipment

Eco-driving

Truck department Hybrid yard tractor utilization

Promote aging truck replacement

Minimum the idling time

Others LED light in the Port

Develop renew and recycle resource energy

The Green Port measures in this study are e-RTGC AMP AGV Green Ship

certification system incentives on the new clean technology Green Flag(speed

reduction incentive)eco-friendly transport means conversion joint distribution

the cost on account of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction polities and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

The details and definition on each Green Port measure and the relationship with

Port Competitiveness will be expressed in next chapter

24

Chapter 3 The Relationship between Port

Competitiveness and Green Port Construction

31 Port Competitiveness Literature Review

Although past studies on port selection models have focused on port selection

made by port facilities port services port rates and charge and location

Murphy made a survey between 534 shipping companies and port authorities in

1989 and between 1850 shipping companies and port authorities in 1992

Comparing with other papers Murphys got a survey among more widely

objects In his paper port selection(port competitiveness) was seen to affected by

facilities situation appropriate pilotage max ship entrance probability the

25

capability of handling non-regular cargos whether to provide information of ship

nationality or not and port services level

In French model (1979) there are two factors affecting the port selection (port

competitiveness) endogenous factor and exogenous factor In endogenous factors

there are adequacy and physical plant condition of terminal facilities terminal rate

and charges frequency and geographic coverage of ship and freight services the

capacity of connecting to inland rails or transport net and the services provides for

the shipping or logistics And exogenous factors included the size and economic

capacity of hinterland as a source exports or market for imports national

economic situation trade policy and support established by government the

situation at home and abroad

The same as Frenchs paper in Paters paper in 1990 there are endogenous and

exogenous factors too In endogenous there are the services provides for the

shipping or logistics capacity of terminal facilities situation and condition of

facilities operation strategies established by port authority convenience to utilize

And the political situation at home and abroad social change economic factor

stabilized labor and capital However in 2004 there is a tremendous change in

Peters new paper There are four parts multi-modal process interface transport

modes infrastructure Multi-model Process part includes ship entrance rapid

speed and accuracy shipper and shipping companies reactive operation flexibility

Interface includes labor power information technology and so on And there are

26

ship calls frequency and amount of fleet factors in the transport modes part In the

infrastructure part includes port facility equipments and so on

Port facilities rates and charges services inland situation and social

circumstance factors affect the port selection and competitiveness a lot from the

research until 1992 by Murphy And in Lirn and Pater research 2003-2004 the

new and detail factors are shown to us

We can clearly see the contents in next table

27

Table 311 Prevention literature research results

Influence factors

French

(1979)

Endogenous

port facilities port rate and charges calls frequency port services

port connection with inland

Exogenous

economic size of hinterland national economic situation trade

policy home and abroad situation

Willingale

(1982)

voyage distance economy size entrance to port and route port

facilities max ship entrance probability port operation rates and

charges port authority scale of port

Slack

(1985)

cost of inland transportation port proximity ship demurrage

multi-transport

Peter

(1990)

Endogenous

port facilities condition of facilities operation strategies

convenience to utilize

Exogenous

political situation social change economic factor stabilized labor

and capital

UNCTAD

(1992)

port facilities services location level of financial industry

information communication system social circumstances economic

stability

Murphy

(1992)

facilities situation appropriate pilotage max ship entrance

probability the capability of handling non-regular cargos whether to

provide information of ship nationality or not port services level

Lirn

(2003-2004)

physical and technologic facilities geopolitical location port

operation and management shipping and terminal cost

Peter

(2004)

Multi-modal Process

ship entrance rapid speed and accuracy shipper and shipping

companies reactive operation flexibility

Interface labor and capital

Transport modes ship calls frequency and amount of fleet factors

28

And there are many experts and scholars research for the influence factors to

port selection and competitiveness in Korea The specific content follows table5

Table 312 Literature research in Korean academia

Influence factors

Jeon Il-su (1992) location facilities charges service level (EDI) terminal operation

port authority

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

( 1993 )

location facilities throughput charges service operation

situation

Kim Hak-so

(1993)

export shipping amount of annual cost of each ton of cargo

marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km of

cargo loading time

import marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km

of cargo amount of liner ship

Yeo Gi-tae (1996) location facilities throughput charge service operation situation

Ha Dong-u amp

Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

location facilities service level logistics charges environment of

logistics service

Yeo Gi-tae (1999) location facilities throughput charges service

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

throughput quay length yard area GNP

Kum Jong-su

(2001)

distance between port and cargo site terminal facilities service

the capacity of multi-transport capacity of cargo handling

administrative service rates and charges of inland transport

congestion

Yeo Gi-tae (2002) location throughput facilities service level

Kim Jin-gu (2002) port facilities location cargo amount rates and charges services

29

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005)

voyage degree to attract cargo cargo handling cost amount of

handling cargo connection to inland service reliability location

berth availability quay length feeder network depth

transshipment volumes cargo security profitability

offing degree to attract cargo berth availability cargo handling

cost transshipment volumes

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005)

cargo handling amount port facilities location rates and charges

level of service

Heo Yun-su

(2005)

port facilities rates and charges services marketing geopolitics

location economic and social circumstance

Kim Geun-seop

(2007)

port services facilities cargo handling amount location cost

productivity factor global factor

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) rates and charges services port characteristics

Many experts and scholars make a research on port selection and

competitiveness recently But the factors selection criteria are difference

Nevertheless the main factors are facilities services cost and so on

Therefore port competitiveness factors which chose in this study are port

facilities port services port rates and charges and social circumstance

However the main factors are not the whole factors any more more and more

detail factors and characteristic factors appearance Port selection and

competitiveness factors have changed And the development content is introduced

in next part

30

32 Port Competitiveness Development Tree

As mentioned above port facilities port rates and charges and port location are

the basic factors in the port selection and competitiveness

From the following table we can discover that first one facilities rates and

charges and location are the most important factor in port selection and

competitiveness second one the importance of social circumstance turns larger

inland connection is necessary all the time

Table 321 Main factor in the Pretentious Research

31

port facilities rates and

charges

inland

connection

social

circumstance location

French (1979) radic radic radic

Wiliingale (1982) radic radic

Slack (1985) radic

Pater (1990) radic radic

UNCTAD (1992) radic radic radic

Murphy(1992) radic

Jeon Il-su (1992) radic radic radic

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

(1993)

radic radic radic

Kim Hak-so

(1993) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1996) radic radic radic

Ha Dong-u

amp Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1998) radic radic radic

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

radic

Kum Jong-su

(2001) radic radic radic radic

Kim Jin-gu(2002) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(2002) radic radic

Lirn(2003-2004) radic radic radic

Pater(2004) radic

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005) radic radic radic

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005) radic radic radic

Heo Yun-su

(2005) radic radic radic radic

Kim Geun-seop

(2007) radic radic radic radic

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) radic

32

33 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green

Port Construction

Following the research above Port facilities rates and charges inland

connection and social circumstance are chose in this study port selection and

competitiveness department

e-RTGC Electric rubber tired gantry crane is a mobile gantry crane used for

stacking intermodal containers within the stacking areas of a container terminal

e-RTGC are used at container terminals and container storage yards to straddling

multiple lanes of railroad and container storage or when maximum storage

density in the container stack is desired

AMP is shorted for Alternative Marine Power and Itrsquos a facility which

provides the electric system in the land for ship which entry in the port The

facility can reduce emissions which ship get entrance in the port

AGV is a mobile robot that follows markers or wires in the floor or uses

vision or lasers They are most often used in industrial applications to move

materials around a manufacturing facility or a warehouse Automatic Guided

Vehicle systems work around-the-clock making continuous flow and just-in-time

delivery easier to achieve Application of the automatic guided vehicle has broade

33

ned during the late 20th century and they are no longer restricted to industrial

environments

The e-RTGC AMP and AGV are the new clean facilities and equipments in the

Green Port they donrsquot reduce the efficiency of handling cargo and they also

reduce the CO2 emission account

Green ship certification system if a ship utilizes clean and CO2 emission

reduction technology on the ship building adds equipment and management and

son on certification would be received And the port authority gives some

incentive and preferential treatment among 45 ports Such as a better schedule is

provided for green membership ship priority in handing cargo and discount on

entrance fee

Incentives on the new cleaning technology There are two expressions about

this measure one is that the port authority give a incentive to ship which have a

great utilization on the new cleaning technology and the other one is that

environment provide many incentives to the authority which utilize the new

cleaning technology in the port such as LED street lamp solar power cranes

Green flag The Green Flag incentive program was set up to encourage ships to

slow down in order to improve air quality The Green Flag program provides

approximately $2 million a year in discounts for vessel operators who slow their

ships to 12 knots (22kmh) or less within 20miles (32km) of the harbor

34

According to the Port the Green Flag program reduced air pollution by 600tons in

2007 and is expected to do better in 2008

All of Green ship certification system incentives on the new cleaning

technology and Green Flag are incentives provided for users of port and aimed at

reduce port rates and charges So the 3 measures belong to affect port rates and

charges

Eco-friendly transport means conversion Eco-friendly means of transport are

much accounted of green port for example railway discharge less GHG emission

than truck barge with a clean engine among the river and inshore canal

Joint distribution joint distribution is a collaborative system which port

provides among many logistics companies It can make the cargo handling speed

rapidly and reduce cargo storage time for CO2 emission reducing such as

refrigerated container In an addition it also makes the logistics companies

transport more efficient

Cost on amount of CO2 emission differenced from other port the cost on

amount of CO2 is included in the port cost The cost aims to reduce the CO2

emission directly

CO2 emission reduction policies compared with other traditional port Green

Port gives more cost discount and incentives but in an addition there are many

policies on CO2 emission restriction Such as aging trucks restrictions in inland

transport department ship entry speed reduced and fuel changed in the ship

35

department and so on Whether these restriction policies constrain port

development or not and the degree of these policies constrain port development

will be explain by the AHP results

Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors some ports in the

western countries are opened as a travel place for visitors so as to change the

polluted impress and raise the position in our heart

Cost on amount of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction policies and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors can affect the social

circumstance factor Whether these measures can or not improve the social

circumstance and port competitiveness we have to see the next calculation and

results

36

Chapter 4 The Green Port Competitiveness

Analysis

41 The Green Port Competitiveness Model by AHP

The AHP is one multi-criteria decision making method which has been

extensively applied to a variety of decision-making situations The multi-criteria

techniques are considered to be a promising framework for evaluation of

decision-making factors since they have the potential to take into account

conflicting multidimensional incommensurable and uncertain effects of

decisions explicitly

In order to apply the AHP method a hierarchical decision schema was

constructed by decomposing the decision problem into its decision elements

37

After that the importance or preferences of the decision elements are examined in

a pair-wise comparison to the elements in the hierarchy The parameters are

estimated using pair-wise comparisons between the importance of the attribute or

decision element in the function using data made by each responder Making

comparisons is a question of which of the two attributes is more import as well as

how much more important

Follow these theories the Green Port Competitiveness Model choose factors as

follow in port competitiveness factors part there are port facilities port rates and

charges inland connection social circumstance in Green Port construction part

there are e-RTGC AMP AGV green ship certification system green flag

incentives on the new cleaning technology eco-friendly transport means

conversion joint distribution CO2 emission reduction policies cost on amount of

CO2 emission beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

38

Figure 41 Green Port Competitiveness AHP model

Follow the Green Port Competitiveness AHP as shown we set a questionnaire

survey to many experts scholars working in logistics system area And we got 15

ones and 14 ones results are believable and integrated

42 Green Port Competitiveness Analysis

39

The key to construction of the factors which affects the port competitiveness

is to determine the conceptual model The selection of the factors directly affects

the evaluation of the result In order to ensure the accuracy objectivity and

practicality of evaluation results the following basic principles must be followed

when selecting factors systematic principles the principle of universal

comparability practical principle and goal-oriented principle In view of the

foregoing the competitiveness which affected by Green Port construction model

is made The analysis follows established principles of port competitiveness

evaluation taking into account the characteristics and functions of the port as well

as port facilities port services port rates and charges ship entrance inland

connection social circumstances and so on

(1) Port facilities

e-RTGC U11 AMP U12 AGV U13

(2) Port rates and charges

Green ship certification system U21 Incentives on the new clean

technology U22 Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

(3) Inland connection

Eco-friendly means of transport U31 Joint distribution U32

(4) Social circumstances

40

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41 CO2 emission reduction policies

U42 Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors U43

Table 421 Details of Level I and Level II values

Level I

indicators Symbol Level II indicators Symbol

Port facilities A1

e-RTGC U11

AMP U12

AGV U13

Port rates and

charges A2

Green ship certification system U21

Incentives on the new clean technology U22

Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

Inland

connection A3

Eco-friendly means of transport U31

Joint distribution U32

Social

circumstances A4

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41

CO2 emissions reduction policies U42

Beautiful environment construction in inner

harbors U43

41

I Determination of level I indicator weights

As the ports competitiveness evaluation indicators at this level are complex

and the elements are not easily quantified AHP is adopted to determine the

indicator weights with the basic steps as follows

(1) Establish a comparative judgment matrix The comparative judgment

matrix is obtained through comparing contributed proportion of multiple

indicators to the overall target by the judgment scale wherein the fuzzy

judgment number introduced is 1 3 5 7 and 9 and the reciprocal of

such number indicates the important degree of one element relatively to

another The results are shown in next table

Table 422 Comparison matrix of level I indicators

A1 A2 A3 A4

A1 1 15 13 3

A2 5 1 3 7

A3 3 13 1 5

A4 13 17 15 1

(2) Calculate the characteristic vector of the comparative judgment matrix

which refers to the weighted vector of the indicator The writer adopts

42

the geometric method to calculate the characteristic vector The

calculated result is as follows

ω=(012 0560 026 006)T λmax=418 It can be obtained from the table

RI=09 Wherein ω is the characteristic vector corresponding to the

maximum characteristic value λmax of the comparative judgment matrix

namely the weighted vector of the indicator RI is the average

consistency indicator as shown in following table

Table423 Average random consistency indicator RI

Matrix Order

RI

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

0 0 058 09 112 124 132 141

Matrix Order

RI

9 10 11 12 13 14 15

145 149 152 154 156 158 159

(3) Conduct consistency check on the comparative judgment matrix Adopt

the random consistency proportion CR to judge the consistency of the

comparative judgment matrix According to CI= (λmax -n)(n-1) and

CR=CIRI it can be obtained through calculation CR=007lt01 Thus

this comparative judgment matrix has a satisfactory consistency and the

indicator weight coefficient calculated through this matrix is acceptable

43

II Determination of level II indicator weights

The data at this level are the details of level Ⅰ indicator The judgment

matrix obtained through comparing multiple sub-indicators under Level Ⅰ

indicators is adopted to determine the weights of sub-indicators under each

indicator one by one The specific steps are as follows

(1) The experts score the weights within the given range To determine the

weights of several small indicators under the same big indicator it is

supposed that the score of small indicator ｋ under the indicator j made

by the expert i is Xijk wherein i=12n n is the total number of

experts ј=12m m is the total number of LevelⅡ indicator к

=12Oj Oj is the number of small indicators under the big indicator ј

іјк IJK LRC l I j k

(2) The credit rating of the expert і is l l =1 2 3 l =1 indicates this expert

is quite familiar with the evaluated contents l =2 indicator this expert is

44

with the evaluated contents l =3 indicates this expert is not quite familiar

with the evaluated contents yi1 is the=08 yi2 =05 and yi3=1

(3) The comprehensive evaluation score of small indicator l under the

indicator j is as follows

(4) The formula for normalization processing of indicator weights is as

follows and the absolute weight of the indicator set is marked as

q=(q1q2q11)

(5) Because of the same justification and principle we donrsquot give the detail

about the calculation The same with the level Ⅰ calculation we

manipulation data one by one and get 14 results And obtain the average

45

results by weighted average method The results detail as Table for the

final weights of Level-Ⅱ evaluation indicators

Above the calculation process and method are just one of data from the

questionable surveys In this study the final results are got from the

weighted average by the results of each questionable survey

The final results are shown as Table424

Table424 Indicator weights table of indicator system

Level I

indicators Weight LevelⅡ indicators

Relative

weight

Absolute

weight

Importance

percentage

Port Facilities

A1 02735

e-RTGC U11 05506 01506 1506

AMP U12 01648 00451 451

AGV U13 02826 00773 773

Port Rates and

Charges A2

02902

Green ship certification s

ystem U21 04724 01371 1371

Incentives on the new

clean technology U22 02871 00833 833

Green Flag (speed

reduction incentive)U23 02405 00698 698

Inland

connection A3

02865

Eco-friendly means of

transport U31 05942 01702 1702

Joint distribution U32 04058 01163 1163

Social

environmentA4 00863

Cost on amount of CO2

emission U41 03698 00319 319

CO2 emissions reduction

policies U42 02273 00196 196

Beautiful environment

construction in inner

harbors U43

04029 00348 348

46

III Case study

In the questionable survey we also got the mark of Green Port measures

evaluation value of many main ports such as Singapore Port Shanghai Port

Hongkong Port Busan Port LALB Port Rotterdam Port and Yocohama Port

The highest mark is 5 and lowest one is 1

Table425 Evaluation value of many main ports

Singapore

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

LALB

Port

Rotterdam

Port

Yocohama

Port

Port facilities 38000 36000 34000 38182 38000 42000 32000

Port rates and

charges 32000 36000 31000 35455 32000 39000 33000

Inland

connection 39000 34545 35000 29091 35000 45000 36000

Social

circumstance 42000 32727 41000 32000 38000 42727 36000

With the Green Port and Port competitiveness indicator weights results these

ports got the final evaluation value

47

Table426 Final evaluation value on main ports Green Port measures and

competitiveness

Rotterdam

Port

Singapore

Port

LALB

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

Yocohama

Port

394 345 330 330 319 318 317

43 Results Analysis

From the results table we can obtain the many results as following

① The main Green Port measures which are more important to improve port

competitiveness are Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system the indicator weights are 01702 01506 and

01371 among the 11 indicators

② In the Green Port construction Cost on amount of CO2 emission and CO2

emissions reduction policies are the restrictions indicators but the weight

of two indicators are not big 00319 and 00196 So effect on Green Port

construction to port competitiveness does have the weaken capacity but

not clearly strengthen more clearly Thus Green Port construction really

could improve the port competitiveness

48

③ In the case study traditional ports Rotterdam and Singapore Port give us

better examples on Green Port construction especially Rotterdam Port

④ Hongkong Busan and Yocohama Port all got a lower evaluation value

But in detail Hongkong and Yocohama Port got a lower on the port

facilities and rates and charges Busan Port got a higher on the port

facilities and rates and charges but a lower on the inland connection and

social circumstance

⑤ Shanghai Port doesnrsquot have Particular strength factors but the

comprehensive strength is not bad the same as LALB Port

49

Chapter 5 Conclusion

In this thesis the effects of Green Port construction for improving the port

competitiveness have been studied Under the definition of Green Port the

characteristics of Green Port and its effects has been shown by analysing the AHP

method which based on the questionary survey for Green Port specialists and port

officers

Follow the results of analysis on Green Port competitiveness AHP model

Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green ship certification system is

better for Green Port Construction welcome for shipping companies and citizens

who live around the port And in the analysis of Port competitiveness factors port

rates and charges always affects port competitiveness a lot As a trend inland

connection factor abstracts more attention of shipping companies

50

On the trend of port department each port should take a activity to adjust

strategy for improving its competitiveness Such as in the main ports evaluation

Busan port get a high value on port rates and charges and port facilities but as a

lower value on inland connection factor the final value is not as well as we look

forward In the evaluation of Singapore Port through it gets a lower value on rates

and charges higher value on inland connection and social circumstance causes the

final value are better So the Green Port Construction may be a trend in port

department

In the results of this thesis Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system are better solutions for Green Port Construction And

especially it can be verified that the port rates and charges always affects port

competitiveness Futhermore the investment for Green Port construction and its

effects have to be verified in the future

51

References

1 Hoyle B S and Smith J 1992 Transport and Development In Modern

transport geography edited by B S Hoyle R D Knowles (London Belhaven

Press)pp11-31

2 Beresford A K C De Souza A J R G and Pettit S J 2005 Stategic

development of liner shipping companies and terminal operators Ocean yearbook

19(Chicago 1L The University of Chicago Press) pp 732-750

3 Heaver T D 2002 Supply chain and logistics management implications for

liner shipping In The handbook of maritime economics and business edited by C

Grammenos (LondonLLP) pp 375-396

4 Park T E (2011) A Study on selection criteria of Green Port and evaluation of

major Korean port A masters thesis of graduate school of Incheon university

52

5 JeongBH (2009)Green port management policy directions in the green

growth era- The case of Gwangyang port in Republic of Korea Journal of Korea

Port Economic Association Vol25(3) p361-384

6 Lee J S Han N H(2009) A study on Green Port Revitalization According to

Air Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

7 Lee Y K Nan J W(2010)Green Logistics Policy Analysis and Implications

of Japan

8 Lee B S (2010)Tendency and Countermeasures on Green Logistics in Port

Logistics Company A masters thesis of graduate school of Korean Maritime

university

9 Lee J S (2009) A Study on Green Port Revitalization According to Air

Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

10 Zhang F Y Li Z Lu X J Yao X L(2008)Competitiveness of Inland

Ports Based on F-AHP

11 Port of Long Beach (2009) Green Port Policy wwwpolbcom

12 The port of Los Angeles wwwportoflosangelesorg

1

Chapter 1 Introduction

11 Research background and objective

The Kyoto Protocol is an international agreement linked to the United Nations

Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) The major feature of the

Kyoto Protocol is that it sets binding targets for 37 industrialized countries and the

European community for reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to fight

global warming These amounts will be lower an average of five per cent based on

1990 levels over the five-year period 2008-2012 The protocol was initially

adopted on 11 December 1997 in Japan but entered into force on 16 February

2005 As of July 2010 191 countries and states have signed and ratified the

protocol

2

After ltKyoto Protocolgt has brought out in 1997 more and more people put

their attention on environment pollution Rapid development in industry

department brings out air water soil noise and wildlife pollution and destruction

As the health development of economic alleviating environmental pollution and

restoring original ecology extremely necessary

Focus on the long-term and future development in the port many counties

government and ports authorities pay attentions on Green Port construction

In the short term C40 World Ports Climate Conference draws up some

adaptive plans among big cities and major ports The plans include the incentives

provided to green ship user cooperation among the C40 member ports

encouragement to develop and utilize the Alternative Maritime Power and so on

In EU Green Port major policies is prohibition the ship utilization on fuel

which sulfur content over 2 (after Jun2010 the limitation of sulfur content is

1) There are also Marco Polo I and Marco Polo II plans in EU In Marco Polo I

Modal Shift Action Catalyst Action and Common Learning Action are included

from 2003 to 2006 And after 2007 in Marco II Motorways of the Sea Action

Traffic Avoidance Actions and Rail Synergy are added

In US people pay more attention to developing the new technology for

reducing CO2 emission Such as power generator and renewable resources and

Northwest Ports Clean Air Strategy

3

Compared with other departments green policy in port department is explained

as green maritime and green shipping For example super-eco ship building and

Modal Shift promotion

The same aim to Hong Kong Ports AMP E-RTG hybrid truck bio-diesel

recycling energy CNG LNG and development are in utilization

ldquoGreen Growth Policyrdquo is the measure which brought out by the Korean

government Follow this strategy Korean port authority also takes out the ldquoGreen

Port building comprehensive planrdquo Furthermore low carbon self-sufficiency port

the disaster safety port eco-friendly port and resource recycling port are the

understandings on the Korean ldquoGreen Growth Policyrdquo

As the port support policies being changed port competitiveness factors are

changed Especially the importance degree of each factor has been changed a

lot The purpose of this study is explaining the competitiveness effects changed

which taking Green Port measures and programs port and give a better advice and

suggestion to Green Port construction

12 Scope and structure of research

The method to analysis the effects of Green Port construction for improving

port competitiveness is AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process)

4

And research process in this study is shown in ltFigure 1gt

ltFigure 1gt Research process

In chapter 1 research background and objective research method and process

are included And chapter 2 introduces the Green Port construction background

definition the Green Port construction situation in many countries and each

department introduction in Green Port construction The chapter 3 views the

literature on port competitiveness and obtains the influence factors used in this

study trend and relationship between port competitiveness The chapter 4 based

5

on the survey data and calculates each indicator importance degree by AHP

method and analysis the result Finally in chapter 5 the conclusion summary the

whole study by the result analysis

6

Chapter 2 Green Port Construction Situation

21 Green Port Construction Background

As the United Nations Secretary General has said the greatest challenge which

we are facing is environmental regulators It is a growing crisis with economic

health and safety food production security and other dimensions

The Kyoto Protocol is an international agreement linked to the United Nations

Framework Convention on Climate Change The major feature of the Kyoto

Protocol is that it sets binding targets for 37 industrialized countries and the

European community for reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to fight

global warming These amount to an average of five percent bellow 1990 level

over the five-year period 2008-2012

The protocol was initially adopted on 11 December 1997 in Japan but all of the

member countries entered into force on16 February 2005 The Kyoto Protocol

7

was adopted in Kyoto Japan on 11 December 1997 and entered into force on 16

February 2005 The detailed rules for the implementation of the Protocol were

adopted at COP 7 in Marrakesh in 2001 and are called the ldquoMarrakesh Accordsrdquo

Follow the ltKyoto Protocolgt several flexible mechanisms are allowed Such

as emissions trading the clean development mechanism (CDM) and joint

implementation The mechanisms allow AnnexⅠcounties to meet their GHG

emission limitations by purchasing GHG emission reductions credits from

elsewhere through financial exchanges projects that reduce emissions in

non-Annex Ⅰ countries or Annex Ⅰ countries with excess allowances The

mechanisms help stimulate green investment and help Parties meet their emission

targets in a cost-effective way

Therefore many countries take action on reducing the GHG discharge emission

For example increase the energy utilization efficiency develop the solar power

wind energy tidal energy and other clean energy in their industry The details

about objective of GHG emission reduction in main countries are displayed as the

following ltTable 1gt

8

ltTable 1gt Objective of CO2 reduce in main countries

Bench

mark of

Year

Objective

()

Absolute

quantity

()

Remark

EU 1990 20~30 -20~-30 Norway New Zealand 40 reducing

USA 2005 17 -3 Passed by House of Representatives

Japan 1990 25 -25 On the premise of attention with China

India

Korea 2020

(BAU) 30 mdashmdash

Discharge amount is up to 564million don

in estimation

China 2005 40~50 60~150

(2005) Each GDP

India 2005 20-25 mdashmdash With the developed countries

participation

Russia 1990 25 -25 Be neutral country

Norway 1990 30~40 -30~-40 mdashmdash

New

Zealand 1990 10~20 -10~ -20 mdashmdash

Austria 2000 5~25 -3~-11 mdashmdash

Canada 2003 20 -3 mdashmdash

Mexico 2002 50 mdashmdash With the developed countries

participation

South

Africa

2020

(BAU) 34 mdashmdash

With the developed countries

participation

Brazil 2020

(BAU) 36~39

-20

(2005) mdashmdash

(Korean Maritime Institute 20095)

9

22 The Definition of Green Port

As the global warming affecting in the world climate has been heavily changed

natural disaster frequently occurred natural resources depletion and supply

imbalance cause crisis to reach a high level For the purpose of getting away from

financial crisis and creating the new growth motivity the counties in the world

make more efforts on developing economic

Because of the realization of this global climate and environment crisis Korean

government had brought out the ldquoGreen Growth Policyrdquo And it made the ldquoGreen

Growth Policyrdquo be embodied and law-governed announced ldquoLow Carbon Green

Growth of the Basic Lawrdquo

In order to coordinate with this policy and law build up the ldquoGreen Growthrdquo

everyone make their efforts and reach ldquoGreen Growthrdquo in Korea each department

As a important industry department port authority also take activity to match the

national strategy of ldquoGreen Growthrdquo and draw up the plan on ldquoGreen Portrdquo

construction

However there isnrsquot a clear definition about the Green Port Korean Land

Transport and Maritime Ministry have explained the Green Port as follows Green

house gas Reducing Energy Effciencing Nature-friendly Port The explanation is

very easy to understand but from a professional point of view it not very

10

comprehensive and concrete So we have to understand the concept in the Green

Port Construction measures and programs There are about 4 kind explanation and

promotion programs in the Green Port Respectively the port which based on

green technology and green business creating new growth motive improving

living standards jumping in the ranks of the advanced port

ltFigure 2gt Green Port appearance and basic definition

In the Green Growth National Strategy Policy there are 10 pieces of policy

directions and 50 researches each department should choose the appropriate one

Follow these researches chose by port availability especially Low Carbon

11

Self-sufficiency Port The Disaster Safety Port Eco-friendly Port Resource

Recycling Port and in this study Green Port construction is a plan on

comprehensive and mix of 4kinds of Green Port Construction

Table 221 Four Promotions for Green Port Construction

Promotion Program

(Green Port type) Activities

Low-Carbon

Self-Sufficiency Port

Eco-friendly inland transportation system building

New renewable resources power equipment utilization

AMP LED utilization

The Disaster Safety

Port

Disaster Prevention environment infrastructure building

Disaster prediction and corresponding system utilization

Eco-Friendly Port Beauty the port by green park planting and so on

Provide eco-friendly port building programs

Resource Recycling

Port

Port waste (silt soil) effectively recycling system

Establish resource recycling port paragon

As table1 shown each type of Green Port has a separate emphasis

Eco-friendly inland transportation system which encourages utilizing rail canal

barge clean system reduces the truck application amount AMP means

Alternative Maritime Power supply system replaces with ship power generation

The Green Port construction in most of counties is the low-carbon self-sufficiency

12

port And in their construction maybe add a few other type promote director like

beauty the port by green park planting and so on

However in this study the Green Port concept is a comprehensive plan among

4 types not a specialization system

23 Green Port Construction Situation in major countries

After ltKyoto protocolgt having brought out each department began to take

affords on the reducing the GHG (greenhouse gas) emission In port department

the activities are embodied in the Green Port construction In this study many

major ports in US EU Japan and Korea are chose to explain for research

231 US

① LALB Port

In order to achieve to reduce marine pollutants standby and build clean port

LALB Port standby resource ministry and environment protection ministry

signed a 5year plan on clean standby action cooperation

This promotion business plan set a set of marine pollutants standby emission

limitation on the ship department from the statistics year 2006-2007 to 2010-2011

handling department heavy duty equipment truck department and so on Such as

13

in Green Port Technology construction department measures and programs are

shown in following Table

Table231 the details of LALB Port Green Port Promotion Programs

Promotion Program

Heavy Equipment Truck

Heavy Equipment

Replace and Update Aging Facilities

Substitute Fuels and Clean Fuel Incentives

Budgetary for the Development of Substitute Fuels

Marine Vessels Tugs

Ship Speed Reduction within the Port

Electrical supply of parking in the Berth

Use low-sulfur fuel (supplementary motor)

Handling Equipment

Air Quality Monitoring

Measure ambient air pollution levels in the vicinity of

the Port

Include a number of real-time air quality measurements

On the restrict situation of heavy equipment trucks and others vessels must to

be replaced and rebuilt in order to minimum the emission of NOx And the trucks

which donrsquot reach the regulate standard do not allowed to get in the port These

regulations will help their owner to replace and update trucks and also set up a

replacement plan to 16000 aging trucks make the replace done by 2012 As

foundation repaired the cargo owner must to pay an addition tax about 20ft 35$

40ft 79$

14

In the maritime department the speed reduction incentive took action in

Jan2005 When ship entry into the port boundary speed must be reduced under

20 miles 12kont At the beginning the effect of this plan is very clearly so the

limitation may be raised to 40mile And AMP (Alternative Maritime Power ) is

encouraged to be built and developed as to ship use their engine and get GHG

emission

② New York- New Jersey Port

The New York- New Jersey Port Authority brought out environment policy on

CO2 emission reduction The main concepts as following first reduce PX SOX

3 each year and CO2 5 Second ship must utilize sulfur-low fuel as a

obligation Third AMP is provided Forth modern the unloading and loading

equipment must be built Fifth promote trucks replacement Sixth reform the ship

engine Seventh invent 9 billion dollars in the following 10 years Eighth invent

to all hybrid equipment (325) Ninth install the hybrid truck in AMPT and

NYCT

③ Seattle Port

15

In Seattle Port Air Environment Maritime Improvement plan has been

accepted in 2005 The plan includes first set up Puget Sound Maritime Air

Forum and make one AMP provide services for two tour ships second change

the diesel hybrid equipment into electric utilization Third use bio-diesel and

diesel catalyst and reduce the emission Forth emphasize the standard and plan of

truck minimum the idling time

Seattle Port Tacoma Port and Vancouver made a assignment and promote

ldquoNorthwest Ports Clean Air Strategyrdquo

④ Auckland Port

Auckland Port set up the aging replacement plan in 2008 and invent 20 milion

dollars gas emission should reach the level And cargo transport system in port

hinterland port authority and Air environment management committee make

cooperation and give an incentive to truck which use new clean technology

Table232 Short term and Long term Green Port Plans in Auckland Port

16

17

232 EU

Rotterdam Port

As the biggest Port in EU Rotterdam Port takes more affords in reducing the

CO2 emission Main programs are low carbon footprint AMP and so on The

limitation of CO2 emission reduces down 50 of 1990 by 2025

In July 2008 the authority of Rotterdam port gave international cooperation

with other ports an extra boost by organizing the World Ports Climate Conference

During this conference the authority of Rotterdam discussed possible ways in

which ports and business could reduce air pollution and CO2 emissions The

proposals the authority of Rotterdam was set out in a declaration which was

supported by all 55 port cities attending the conference The conference resulted

in five projects to improve air quality and reduce CO2 emissions The authority of

Rotterdam is behind the project to further elaborate an Environmental Ship Index

The Rotterdam Climate Initiative is a joint venture with the municipality of

Rotterdam DCMR Environmental Protection Agency Rijnmond and Deltalinqs

Common goal is to halve CO2 emissions in the region by 2025 in comparison with

1990 levels In connection with the Rotterdam Climate Initiative the port works

on (together with DCMR and others) creating an infrastructure for the capture

18

transport and storage of CO2 A business case presented in the summer of 2008 is

now being elaborated into a business plan The business case concludes that

Rotterdam can begin in 2015 with the capture transport and underground storage

of five million tons of CO2 per annum This means that the basic infrastructure

will then be in place for further growth in capture and storage to twenty million

tons in 2025

In 2008 a start was made on the development of a sustainability index for

activities relating to the P for Planet (environment) In 2009 it will further expand

the index to cover the P for People and the P for Profit In the first phase of the

sustainability index CO2 footprint sustainable purchasing sustainable building

and sustainable land allocation will be covered

233 Japan

① Tacoma Port

In the Tacoma Port there are some programs on protecting the air water and

soil environment

In the air protection department ldquoNorthwest Ports Clean Air Strategyrdquo

ldquoGreen Gateway for Traderdquo and ldquoTruck Programrdquo had brought out to against air

pollution The concepts include using ultra-low sulfur diesel bio-diesel and other

cleaner-burning fuels in cargo-handling equipment using low-sulfur distillate

19

fuels at berth adding ldquogreen designrdquo environmental features to ships including

diesel-electric motors that save up to 30 percent in fuel and significantly reduce

emissions setting targets to change older less-efficient truck engines installing

anti-idling devices on rail-switching engines as well as partnering on other

innovative technological advance

The Port of Tacomarsquos four dockside rail yards move cargo quickly and

efficiently from container terminals They also reduce the number of trucks on

city streets and highways Each full train that leaves the Port represents 250 to 300

trucks not on our roads reducing roadway congestion and diesel emissions The

lowest emission route to ship cargo from Asia to the US Midwest is through the

Puget Sound according to the results of a study by Herbert Engineering released

in May 2009

And in the land protection program there are successful clean projects open

spaces and future habitat restoration In 2007 the Port purchased about 70 acres

of open space known as Juliarsquos Gulch and Storey Pit located between the

Tideflats and residential Northeast Tacoma Monitor water quality system is in

utilization in the water department in Tacoma Port

② Tokyo Port

In the Tokyo Port Green Port programs are almost similar with Tacoma Port

e-RTGC (Rubber Tired Gantry Crane) the barge between Tokyo and Yocohama

20

which shorten international maritime container cargo transportation land distance

super eco-shipbuilding technology dissemination and promotion green business

certification operation and shippers and logistics companies support cooperation

③ Osaka Port and Hakata Port

AMP electrical power equipment and solar power equipment are in utilization in

Osaka Port E-RTGC and solar power of refrigerated container are in utilization in

the Hakata Port

234 Korea

In Busan Port a set of Green Port took implementation such as LNG truck

E-RTGC equipment utilization eco-friendly transport means conversion (rail

canal barge) and GHG emission reduction obligation Table233

21

ltTable 233gt Summary of the Main Port of Green Port Measures

COUNTRY PORT MEASURES

US

LALB Port

Green flag AMP discharge gas reduction obligation

recommends use of alternative fuels and clean fuel

funding for the development of alternative fuels facilities

by new engine development instead of NOx emissions

green truck program (reduce70-80) low-sulfur fuel

utilization restore and revitalize the Los Cerritos

Wetlands

New York

Port

AMP modernized facilities utilization high speed hybrid

yard

Auckland

Port

Incentives on the new cleaning technology containers

transportation system

Seattle Port

AMP green ship membership Tier 4 level reducing PM

by 1994 level Smart Way program Northwest Ports

Clean Air Strategy

EU Rotterdam

Port

Clean engine (barge) green ship membership carbon

footprint calculation cruise ship which under port

authority change to use low-sulfur fuel low emission

engine development and utilization Green Award AMP

ship recycling incentives

Japan

Tokyo Port

RTGC (Rubber Tired Gantry Crane) apply for the barge

between Tokyo and Yocohama shorten international

maritime container cargo transportation land distance

super eco-shipbuilding technology dissemination and

promotion green business certification operation

shippers and logistics companies support cooperation

Osaka Port AMP electrical power equipment solar power equipment

Hakata Port E-RTGC solar power utilization in refrigerated container

Korea Busan Port

LNG truck E-RTGC eco-friendly transport means

conversion (rail canal barge) GHG emission reduction

obligation

22

24 Green Port Indicators Research

As the previous section list shown Green Port measures and programs are

substantially the same

When a ship entry in the port boundary from voyage many ports give a

incentive on shifting and utilizing sulfur-low fuel and reducing the speed under

20 miles when the ship berth in the port the alternative maritime power are

provided which replace its power generation

Next in the cargo unloading and loading department the same with above

utilization of sulfur-low fuel and electrical equipment are promoted and

eco-driving education to driver is necessary what speed is fuel fully burning and

emission minimum point

In the cargo transport department in other words truck department the

replacement on aging trucks is popular in many ports aging trucks are prohibited

close to port at the same time an incentive or support function are provided on

aging replacement The automated equipments are recommended to utilize in the

Green Port like hybrid yard tractor And a perfect plan on truck running also could

reduce the idling time and against the emission of CO2

The details reference the following Table 241

23

Table241 Green Port measures in port each department

Emission reduction programs

Ship

department

Shipping

in the

port

boundary

Obligation on the utilization of sulfur-low fuel

Reform ship engine and utilize hybrid

Speed reduce in the port entrance(a off-shore fee

incentive)

Off-shore AMP

Shift utilization system of clean fuel

Unloading and loading

department

Obligation on the utilization of sulfur-low fuel

Replace electrical equipment

Eco-driving

Truck department Hybrid yard tractor utilization

Promote aging truck replacement

Minimum the idling time

Others LED light in the Port

Develop renew and recycle resource energy

The Green Port measures in this study are e-RTGC AMP AGV Green Ship

certification system incentives on the new clean technology Green Flag(speed

reduction incentive)eco-friendly transport means conversion joint distribution

the cost on account of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction polities and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

The details and definition on each Green Port measure and the relationship with

Port Competitiveness will be expressed in next chapter

24

Chapter 3 The Relationship between Port

Competitiveness and Green Port Construction

31 Port Competitiveness Literature Review

Although past studies on port selection models have focused on port selection

made by port facilities port services port rates and charge and location

Murphy made a survey between 534 shipping companies and port authorities in

1989 and between 1850 shipping companies and port authorities in 1992

Comparing with other papers Murphys got a survey among more widely

objects In his paper port selection(port competitiveness) was seen to affected by

facilities situation appropriate pilotage max ship entrance probability the

25

capability of handling non-regular cargos whether to provide information of ship

nationality or not and port services level

In French model (1979) there are two factors affecting the port selection (port

competitiveness) endogenous factor and exogenous factor In endogenous factors

there are adequacy and physical plant condition of terminal facilities terminal rate

and charges frequency and geographic coverage of ship and freight services the

capacity of connecting to inland rails or transport net and the services provides for

the shipping or logistics And exogenous factors included the size and economic

capacity of hinterland as a source exports or market for imports national

economic situation trade policy and support established by government the

situation at home and abroad

The same as Frenchs paper in Paters paper in 1990 there are endogenous and

exogenous factors too In endogenous there are the services provides for the

shipping or logistics capacity of terminal facilities situation and condition of

facilities operation strategies established by port authority convenience to utilize

And the political situation at home and abroad social change economic factor

stabilized labor and capital However in 2004 there is a tremendous change in

Peters new paper There are four parts multi-modal process interface transport

modes infrastructure Multi-model Process part includes ship entrance rapid

speed and accuracy shipper and shipping companies reactive operation flexibility

Interface includes labor power information technology and so on And there are

26

ship calls frequency and amount of fleet factors in the transport modes part In the

infrastructure part includes port facility equipments and so on

Port facilities rates and charges services inland situation and social

circumstance factors affect the port selection and competitiveness a lot from the

research until 1992 by Murphy And in Lirn and Pater research 2003-2004 the

new and detail factors are shown to us

We can clearly see the contents in next table

27

Table 311 Prevention literature research results

Influence factors

French

(1979)

Endogenous

port facilities port rate and charges calls frequency port services

port connection with inland

Exogenous

economic size of hinterland national economic situation trade

policy home and abroad situation

Willingale

(1982)

voyage distance economy size entrance to port and route port

facilities max ship entrance probability port operation rates and

charges port authority scale of port

Slack

(1985)

cost of inland transportation port proximity ship demurrage

multi-transport

Peter

(1990)

Endogenous

port facilities condition of facilities operation strategies

convenience to utilize

Exogenous

political situation social change economic factor stabilized labor

and capital

UNCTAD

(1992)

port facilities services location level of financial industry

information communication system social circumstances economic

stability

Murphy

(1992)

facilities situation appropriate pilotage max ship entrance

probability the capability of handling non-regular cargos whether to

provide information of ship nationality or not port services level

Lirn

(2003-2004)

physical and technologic facilities geopolitical location port

operation and management shipping and terminal cost

Peter

(2004)

Multi-modal Process

ship entrance rapid speed and accuracy shipper and shipping

companies reactive operation flexibility

Interface labor and capital

Transport modes ship calls frequency and amount of fleet factors

28

And there are many experts and scholars research for the influence factors to

port selection and competitiveness in Korea The specific content follows table5

Table 312 Literature research in Korean academia

Influence factors

Jeon Il-su (1992) location facilities charges service level (EDI) terminal operation

port authority

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

( 1993 )

location facilities throughput charges service operation

situation

Kim Hak-so

(1993)

export shipping amount of annual cost of each ton of cargo

marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km of

cargo loading time

import marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km

of cargo amount of liner ship

Yeo Gi-tae (1996) location facilities throughput charge service operation situation

Ha Dong-u amp

Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

location facilities service level logistics charges environment of

logistics service

Yeo Gi-tae (1999) location facilities throughput charges service

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

throughput quay length yard area GNP

Kum Jong-su

(2001)

distance between port and cargo site terminal facilities service

the capacity of multi-transport capacity of cargo handling

administrative service rates and charges of inland transport

congestion

Yeo Gi-tae (2002) location throughput facilities service level

Kim Jin-gu (2002) port facilities location cargo amount rates and charges services

29

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005)

voyage degree to attract cargo cargo handling cost amount of

handling cargo connection to inland service reliability location

berth availability quay length feeder network depth

transshipment volumes cargo security profitability

offing degree to attract cargo berth availability cargo handling

cost transshipment volumes

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005)

cargo handling amount port facilities location rates and charges

level of service

Heo Yun-su

(2005)

port facilities rates and charges services marketing geopolitics

location economic and social circumstance

Kim Geun-seop

(2007)

port services facilities cargo handling amount location cost

productivity factor global factor

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) rates and charges services port characteristics

Many experts and scholars make a research on port selection and

competitiveness recently But the factors selection criteria are difference

Nevertheless the main factors are facilities services cost and so on

Therefore port competitiveness factors which chose in this study are port

facilities port services port rates and charges and social circumstance

However the main factors are not the whole factors any more more and more

detail factors and characteristic factors appearance Port selection and

competitiveness factors have changed And the development content is introduced

in next part

30

32 Port Competitiveness Development Tree

As mentioned above port facilities port rates and charges and port location are

the basic factors in the port selection and competitiveness

From the following table we can discover that first one facilities rates and

charges and location are the most important factor in port selection and

competitiveness second one the importance of social circumstance turns larger

inland connection is necessary all the time

Table 321 Main factor in the Pretentious Research

31

port facilities rates and

charges

inland

connection

social

circumstance location

French (1979) radic radic radic

Wiliingale (1982) radic radic

Slack (1985) radic

Pater (1990) radic radic

UNCTAD (1992) radic radic radic

Murphy(1992) radic

Jeon Il-su (1992) radic radic radic

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

(1993)

radic radic radic

Kim Hak-so

(1993) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1996) radic radic radic

Ha Dong-u

amp Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1998) radic radic radic

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

radic

Kum Jong-su

(2001) radic radic radic radic

Kim Jin-gu(2002) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(2002) radic radic

Lirn(2003-2004) radic radic radic

Pater(2004) radic

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005) radic radic radic

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005) radic radic radic

Heo Yun-su

(2005) radic radic radic radic

Kim Geun-seop

(2007) radic radic radic radic

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) radic

32

33 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green

Port Construction

Following the research above Port facilities rates and charges inland

connection and social circumstance are chose in this study port selection and

competitiveness department

e-RTGC Electric rubber tired gantry crane is a mobile gantry crane used for

stacking intermodal containers within the stacking areas of a container terminal

e-RTGC are used at container terminals and container storage yards to straddling

multiple lanes of railroad and container storage or when maximum storage

density in the container stack is desired

AMP is shorted for Alternative Marine Power and Itrsquos a facility which

provides the electric system in the land for ship which entry in the port The

facility can reduce emissions which ship get entrance in the port

AGV is a mobile robot that follows markers or wires in the floor or uses

vision or lasers They are most often used in industrial applications to move

materials around a manufacturing facility or a warehouse Automatic Guided

Vehicle systems work around-the-clock making continuous flow and just-in-time

delivery easier to achieve Application of the automatic guided vehicle has broade

33

ned during the late 20th century and they are no longer restricted to industrial

environments

The e-RTGC AMP and AGV are the new clean facilities and equipments in the

Green Port they donrsquot reduce the efficiency of handling cargo and they also

reduce the CO2 emission account

Green ship certification system if a ship utilizes clean and CO2 emission

reduction technology on the ship building adds equipment and management and

son on certification would be received And the port authority gives some

incentive and preferential treatment among 45 ports Such as a better schedule is

provided for green membership ship priority in handing cargo and discount on

entrance fee

Incentives on the new cleaning technology There are two expressions about

this measure one is that the port authority give a incentive to ship which have a

great utilization on the new cleaning technology and the other one is that

environment provide many incentives to the authority which utilize the new

cleaning technology in the port such as LED street lamp solar power cranes

Green flag The Green Flag incentive program was set up to encourage ships to

slow down in order to improve air quality The Green Flag program provides

approximately $2 million a year in discounts for vessel operators who slow their

ships to 12 knots (22kmh) or less within 20miles (32km) of the harbor

34

According to the Port the Green Flag program reduced air pollution by 600tons in

2007 and is expected to do better in 2008

All of Green ship certification system incentives on the new cleaning

technology and Green Flag are incentives provided for users of port and aimed at

reduce port rates and charges So the 3 measures belong to affect port rates and

charges

Eco-friendly transport means conversion Eco-friendly means of transport are

much accounted of green port for example railway discharge less GHG emission

than truck barge with a clean engine among the river and inshore canal

Joint distribution joint distribution is a collaborative system which port

provides among many logistics companies It can make the cargo handling speed

rapidly and reduce cargo storage time for CO2 emission reducing such as

refrigerated container In an addition it also makes the logistics companies

transport more efficient

Cost on amount of CO2 emission differenced from other port the cost on

amount of CO2 is included in the port cost The cost aims to reduce the CO2

emission directly

CO2 emission reduction policies compared with other traditional port Green

Port gives more cost discount and incentives but in an addition there are many

policies on CO2 emission restriction Such as aging trucks restrictions in inland

transport department ship entry speed reduced and fuel changed in the ship

35

department and so on Whether these restriction policies constrain port

development or not and the degree of these policies constrain port development

will be explain by the AHP results

Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors some ports in the

western countries are opened as a travel place for visitors so as to change the

polluted impress and raise the position in our heart

Cost on amount of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction policies and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors can affect the social

circumstance factor Whether these measures can or not improve the social

circumstance and port competitiveness we have to see the next calculation and

results

36

Chapter 4 The Green Port Competitiveness

Analysis

41 The Green Port Competitiveness Model by AHP

The AHP is one multi-criteria decision making method which has been

extensively applied to a variety of decision-making situations The multi-criteria

techniques are considered to be a promising framework for evaluation of

decision-making factors since they have the potential to take into account

conflicting multidimensional incommensurable and uncertain effects of

decisions explicitly

In order to apply the AHP method a hierarchical decision schema was

constructed by decomposing the decision problem into its decision elements

37

After that the importance or preferences of the decision elements are examined in

a pair-wise comparison to the elements in the hierarchy The parameters are

estimated using pair-wise comparisons between the importance of the attribute or

decision element in the function using data made by each responder Making

comparisons is a question of which of the two attributes is more import as well as

how much more important

Follow these theories the Green Port Competitiveness Model choose factors as

follow in port competitiveness factors part there are port facilities port rates and

charges inland connection social circumstance in Green Port construction part

there are e-RTGC AMP AGV green ship certification system green flag

incentives on the new cleaning technology eco-friendly transport means

conversion joint distribution CO2 emission reduction policies cost on amount of

CO2 emission beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

38

Figure 41 Green Port Competitiveness AHP model

Follow the Green Port Competitiveness AHP as shown we set a questionnaire

survey to many experts scholars working in logistics system area And we got 15

ones and 14 ones results are believable and integrated

42 Green Port Competitiveness Analysis

39

The key to construction of the factors which affects the port competitiveness

is to determine the conceptual model The selection of the factors directly affects

the evaluation of the result In order to ensure the accuracy objectivity and

practicality of evaluation results the following basic principles must be followed

when selecting factors systematic principles the principle of universal

comparability practical principle and goal-oriented principle In view of the

foregoing the competitiveness which affected by Green Port construction model

is made The analysis follows established principles of port competitiveness

evaluation taking into account the characteristics and functions of the port as well

as port facilities port services port rates and charges ship entrance inland

connection social circumstances and so on

(1) Port facilities

e-RTGC U11 AMP U12 AGV U13

(2) Port rates and charges

Green ship certification system U21 Incentives on the new clean

technology U22 Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

(3) Inland connection

Eco-friendly means of transport U31 Joint distribution U32

(4) Social circumstances

40

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41 CO2 emission reduction policies

U42 Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors U43

Table 421 Details of Level I and Level II values

Level I

indicators Symbol Level II indicators Symbol

Port facilities A1

e-RTGC U11

AMP U12

AGV U13

Port rates and

charges A2

Green ship certification system U21

Incentives on the new clean technology U22

Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

Inland

connection A3

Eco-friendly means of transport U31

Joint distribution U32

Social

circumstances A4

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41

CO2 emissions reduction policies U42

Beautiful environment construction in inner

harbors U43

41

I Determination of level I indicator weights

As the ports competitiveness evaluation indicators at this level are complex

and the elements are not easily quantified AHP is adopted to determine the

indicator weights with the basic steps as follows

(1) Establish a comparative judgment matrix The comparative judgment

matrix is obtained through comparing contributed proportion of multiple

indicators to the overall target by the judgment scale wherein the fuzzy

judgment number introduced is 1 3 5 7 and 9 and the reciprocal of

such number indicates the important degree of one element relatively to

another The results are shown in next table

Table 422 Comparison matrix of level I indicators

A1 A2 A3 A4

A1 1 15 13 3

A2 5 1 3 7

A3 3 13 1 5

A4 13 17 15 1

(2) Calculate the characteristic vector of the comparative judgment matrix

which refers to the weighted vector of the indicator The writer adopts

42

the geometric method to calculate the characteristic vector The

calculated result is as follows

ω=(012 0560 026 006)T λmax=418 It can be obtained from the table

RI=09 Wherein ω is the characteristic vector corresponding to the

maximum characteristic value λmax of the comparative judgment matrix

namely the weighted vector of the indicator RI is the average

consistency indicator as shown in following table

Table423 Average random consistency indicator RI

Matrix Order

RI

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

0 0 058 09 112 124 132 141

Matrix Order

RI

9 10 11 12 13 14 15

145 149 152 154 156 158 159

(3) Conduct consistency check on the comparative judgment matrix Adopt

the random consistency proportion CR to judge the consistency of the

comparative judgment matrix According to CI= (λmax -n)(n-1) and

CR=CIRI it can be obtained through calculation CR=007lt01 Thus

this comparative judgment matrix has a satisfactory consistency and the

indicator weight coefficient calculated through this matrix is acceptable

43

II Determination of level II indicator weights

The data at this level are the details of level Ⅰ indicator The judgment

matrix obtained through comparing multiple sub-indicators under Level Ⅰ

indicators is adopted to determine the weights of sub-indicators under each

indicator one by one The specific steps are as follows

(1) The experts score the weights within the given range To determine the

weights of several small indicators under the same big indicator it is

supposed that the score of small indicator ｋ under the indicator j made

by the expert i is Xijk wherein i=12n n is the total number of

experts ј=12m m is the total number of LevelⅡ indicator к

=12Oj Oj is the number of small indicators under the big indicator ј

іјк IJK LRC l I j k

(2) The credit rating of the expert і is l l =1 2 3 l =1 indicates this expert

is quite familiar with the evaluated contents l =2 indicator this expert is

44

with the evaluated contents l =3 indicates this expert is not quite familiar

with the evaluated contents yi1 is the=08 yi2 =05 and yi3=1

(3) The comprehensive evaluation score of small indicator l under the

indicator j is as follows

(4) The formula for normalization processing of indicator weights is as

follows and the absolute weight of the indicator set is marked as

q=(q1q2q11)

(5) Because of the same justification and principle we donrsquot give the detail

about the calculation The same with the level Ⅰ calculation we

manipulation data one by one and get 14 results And obtain the average

45

results by weighted average method The results detail as Table for the

final weights of Level-Ⅱ evaluation indicators

Above the calculation process and method are just one of data from the

questionable surveys In this study the final results are got from the

weighted average by the results of each questionable survey

The final results are shown as Table424

Table424 Indicator weights table of indicator system

Level I

indicators Weight LevelⅡ indicators

Relative

weight

Absolute

weight

Importance

percentage

Port Facilities

A1 02735

e-RTGC U11 05506 01506 1506

AMP U12 01648 00451 451

AGV U13 02826 00773 773

Port Rates and

Charges A2

02902

Green ship certification s

ystem U21 04724 01371 1371

Incentives on the new

clean technology U22 02871 00833 833

Green Flag (speed

reduction incentive)U23 02405 00698 698

Inland

connection A3

02865

Eco-friendly means of

transport U31 05942 01702 1702

Joint distribution U32 04058 01163 1163

Social

environmentA4 00863

Cost on amount of CO2

emission U41 03698 00319 319

CO2 emissions reduction

policies U42 02273 00196 196

Beautiful environment

construction in inner

harbors U43

04029 00348 348

46

III Case study

In the questionable survey we also got the mark of Green Port measures

evaluation value of many main ports such as Singapore Port Shanghai Port

Hongkong Port Busan Port LALB Port Rotterdam Port and Yocohama Port

The highest mark is 5 and lowest one is 1

Table425 Evaluation value of many main ports

Singapore

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

LALB

Port

Rotterdam

Port

Yocohama

Port

Port facilities 38000 36000 34000 38182 38000 42000 32000

Port rates and

charges 32000 36000 31000 35455 32000 39000 33000

Inland

connection 39000 34545 35000 29091 35000 45000 36000

Social

circumstance 42000 32727 41000 32000 38000 42727 36000

With the Green Port and Port competitiveness indicator weights results these

ports got the final evaluation value

47

Table426 Final evaluation value on main ports Green Port measures and

competitiveness

Rotterdam

Port

Singapore

Port

LALB

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

Yocohama

Port

394 345 330 330 319 318 317

43 Results Analysis

From the results table we can obtain the many results as following

① The main Green Port measures which are more important to improve port

competitiveness are Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system the indicator weights are 01702 01506 and

01371 among the 11 indicators

② In the Green Port construction Cost on amount of CO2 emission and CO2

emissions reduction policies are the restrictions indicators but the weight

of two indicators are not big 00319 and 00196 So effect on Green Port

construction to port competitiveness does have the weaken capacity but

not clearly strengthen more clearly Thus Green Port construction really

could improve the port competitiveness

48

③ In the case study traditional ports Rotterdam and Singapore Port give us

better examples on Green Port construction especially Rotterdam Port

④ Hongkong Busan and Yocohama Port all got a lower evaluation value

But in detail Hongkong and Yocohama Port got a lower on the port

facilities and rates and charges Busan Port got a higher on the port

facilities and rates and charges but a lower on the inland connection and

social circumstance

⑤ Shanghai Port doesnrsquot have Particular strength factors but the

comprehensive strength is not bad the same as LALB Port

49

Chapter 5 Conclusion

In this thesis the effects of Green Port construction for improving the port

competitiveness have been studied Under the definition of Green Port the

characteristics of Green Port and its effects has been shown by analysing the AHP

method which based on the questionary survey for Green Port specialists and port

officers

Follow the results of analysis on Green Port competitiveness AHP model

Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green ship certification system is

better for Green Port Construction welcome for shipping companies and citizens

who live around the port And in the analysis of Port competitiveness factors port

rates and charges always affects port competitiveness a lot As a trend inland

connection factor abstracts more attention of shipping companies

50

On the trend of port department each port should take a activity to adjust

strategy for improving its competitiveness Such as in the main ports evaluation

Busan port get a high value on port rates and charges and port facilities but as a

lower value on inland connection factor the final value is not as well as we look

forward In the evaluation of Singapore Port through it gets a lower value on rates

and charges higher value on inland connection and social circumstance causes the

final value are better So the Green Port Construction may be a trend in port

department

In the results of this thesis Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system are better solutions for Green Port Construction And

especially it can be verified that the port rates and charges always affects port

competitiveness Futhermore the investment for Green Port construction and its

effects have to be verified in the future

51

References

1 Hoyle B S and Smith J 1992 Transport and Development In Modern

transport geography edited by B S Hoyle R D Knowles (London Belhaven

Press)pp11-31

2 Beresford A K C De Souza A J R G and Pettit S J 2005 Stategic

development of liner shipping companies and terminal operators Ocean yearbook

19(Chicago 1L The University of Chicago Press) pp 732-750

3 Heaver T D 2002 Supply chain and logistics management implications for

liner shipping In The handbook of maritime economics and business edited by C

Grammenos (LondonLLP) pp 375-396

4 Park T E (2011) A Study on selection criteria of Green Port and evaluation of

major Korean port A masters thesis of graduate school of Incheon university

52

5 JeongBH (2009)Green port management policy directions in the green

growth era- The case of Gwangyang port in Republic of Korea Journal of Korea

Port Economic Association Vol25(3) p361-384

6 Lee J S Han N H(2009) A study on Green Port Revitalization According to

Air Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

7 Lee Y K Nan J W(2010)Green Logistics Policy Analysis and Implications

of Japan

8 Lee B S (2010)Tendency and Countermeasures on Green Logistics in Port

Logistics Company A masters thesis of graduate school of Korean Maritime

university

9 Lee J S (2009) A Study on Green Port Revitalization According to Air

Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

10 Zhang F Y Li Z Lu X J Yao X L(2008)Competitiveness of Inland

Ports Based on F-AHP

11 Port of Long Beach (2009) Green Port Policy wwwpolbcom

12 The port of Los Angeles wwwportoflosangelesorg

2

After ltKyoto Protocolgt has brought out in 1997 more and more people put

their attention on environment pollution Rapid development in industry

department brings out air water soil noise and wildlife pollution and destruction

As the health development of economic alleviating environmental pollution and

restoring original ecology extremely necessary

Focus on the long-term and future development in the port many counties

government and ports authorities pay attentions on Green Port construction

In the short term C40 World Ports Climate Conference draws up some

adaptive plans among big cities and major ports The plans include the incentives

provided to green ship user cooperation among the C40 member ports

encouragement to develop and utilize the Alternative Maritime Power and so on

In EU Green Port major policies is prohibition the ship utilization on fuel

which sulfur content over 2 (after Jun2010 the limitation of sulfur content is

1) There are also Marco Polo I and Marco Polo II plans in EU In Marco Polo I

Modal Shift Action Catalyst Action and Common Learning Action are included

from 2003 to 2006 And after 2007 in Marco II Motorways of the Sea Action

Traffic Avoidance Actions and Rail Synergy are added

In US people pay more attention to developing the new technology for

reducing CO2 emission Such as power generator and renewable resources and

Northwest Ports Clean Air Strategy

3

Compared with other departments green policy in port department is explained

as green maritime and green shipping For example super-eco ship building and

Modal Shift promotion

The same aim to Hong Kong Ports AMP E-RTG hybrid truck bio-diesel

recycling energy CNG LNG and development are in utilization

ldquoGreen Growth Policyrdquo is the measure which brought out by the Korean

government Follow this strategy Korean port authority also takes out the ldquoGreen

Port building comprehensive planrdquo Furthermore low carbon self-sufficiency port

the disaster safety port eco-friendly port and resource recycling port are the

understandings on the Korean ldquoGreen Growth Policyrdquo

As the port support policies being changed port competitiveness factors are

changed Especially the importance degree of each factor has been changed a

lot The purpose of this study is explaining the competitiveness effects changed

which taking Green Port measures and programs port and give a better advice and

suggestion to Green Port construction

12 Scope and structure of research

The method to analysis the effects of Green Port construction for improving

port competitiveness is AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process)

4

And research process in this study is shown in ltFigure 1gt

ltFigure 1gt Research process

In chapter 1 research background and objective research method and process

are included And chapter 2 introduces the Green Port construction background

definition the Green Port construction situation in many countries and each

department introduction in Green Port construction The chapter 3 views the

literature on port competitiveness and obtains the influence factors used in this

study trend and relationship between port competitiveness The chapter 4 based

5

on the survey data and calculates each indicator importance degree by AHP

method and analysis the result Finally in chapter 5 the conclusion summary the

whole study by the result analysis

6

Chapter 2 Green Port Construction Situation

21 Green Port Construction Background

As the United Nations Secretary General has said the greatest challenge which

we are facing is environmental regulators It is a growing crisis with economic

health and safety food production security and other dimensions

The Kyoto Protocol is an international agreement linked to the United Nations

Framework Convention on Climate Change The major feature of the Kyoto

Protocol is that it sets binding targets for 37 industrialized countries and the

European community for reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to fight

global warming These amount to an average of five percent bellow 1990 level

over the five-year period 2008-2012

The protocol was initially adopted on 11 December 1997 in Japan but all of the

member countries entered into force on16 February 2005 The Kyoto Protocol

7

was adopted in Kyoto Japan on 11 December 1997 and entered into force on 16

February 2005 The detailed rules for the implementation of the Protocol were

adopted at COP 7 in Marrakesh in 2001 and are called the ldquoMarrakesh Accordsrdquo

Follow the ltKyoto Protocolgt several flexible mechanisms are allowed Such

as emissions trading the clean development mechanism (CDM) and joint

implementation The mechanisms allow AnnexⅠcounties to meet their GHG

emission limitations by purchasing GHG emission reductions credits from

elsewhere through financial exchanges projects that reduce emissions in

non-Annex Ⅰ countries or Annex Ⅰ countries with excess allowances The

mechanisms help stimulate green investment and help Parties meet their emission

targets in a cost-effective way

Therefore many countries take action on reducing the GHG discharge emission

For example increase the energy utilization efficiency develop the solar power

wind energy tidal energy and other clean energy in their industry The details

about objective of GHG emission reduction in main countries are displayed as the

following ltTable 1gt

8

ltTable 1gt Objective of CO2 reduce in main countries

Bench

mark of

Year

Objective

()

Absolute

quantity

()

Remark

EU 1990 20~30 -20~-30 Norway New Zealand 40 reducing

USA 2005 17 -3 Passed by House of Representatives

Japan 1990 25 -25 On the premise of attention with China

India

Korea 2020

(BAU) 30 mdashmdash

Discharge amount is up to 564million don

in estimation

China 2005 40~50 60~150

(2005) Each GDP

India 2005 20-25 mdashmdash With the developed countries

participation

Russia 1990 25 -25 Be neutral country

Norway 1990 30~40 -30~-40 mdashmdash

New

Zealand 1990 10~20 -10~ -20 mdashmdash

Austria 2000 5~25 -3~-11 mdashmdash

Canada 2003 20 -3 mdashmdash

Mexico 2002 50 mdashmdash With the developed countries

participation

South

Africa

2020

(BAU) 34 mdashmdash

With the developed countries

participation

Brazil 2020

(BAU) 36~39

-20

(2005) mdashmdash

(Korean Maritime Institute 20095)

9

22 The Definition of Green Port

As the global warming affecting in the world climate has been heavily changed

natural disaster frequently occurred natural resources depletion and supply

imbalance cause crisis to reach a high level For the purpose of getting away from

financial crisis and creating the new growth motivity the counties in the world

make more efforts on developing economic

Because of the realization of this global climate and environment crisis Korean

government had brought out the ldquoGreen Growth Policyrdquo And it made the ldquoGreen

Growth Policyrdquo be embodied and law-governed announced ldquoLow Carbon Green

Growth of the Basic Lawrdquo

In order to coordinate with this policy and law build up the ldquoGreen Growthrdquo

everyone make their efforts and reach ldquoGreen Growthrdquo in Korea each department

As a important industry department port authority also take activity to match the

national strategy of ldquoGreen Growthrdquo and draw up the plan on ldquoGreen Portrdquo

construction

However there isnrsquot a clear definition about the Green Port Korean Land

Transport and Maritime Ministry have explained the Green Port as follows Green

house gas Reducing Energy Effciencing Nature-friendly Port The explanation is

very easy to understand but from a professional point of view it not very

10

comprehensive and concrete So we have to understand the concept in the Green

Port Construction measures and programs There are about 4 kind explanation and

promotion programs in the Green Port Respectively the port which based on

green technology and green business creating new growth motive improving

living standards jumping in the ranks of the advanced port

ltFigure 2gt Green Port appearance and basic definition

In the Green Growth National Strategy Policy there are 10 pieces of policy

directions and 50 researches each department should choose the appropriate one

Follow these researches chose by port availability especially Low Carbon

11

Self-sufficiency Port The Disaster Safety Port Eco-friendly Port Resource

Recycling Port and in this study Green Port construction is a plan on

comprehensive and mix of 4kinds of Green Port Construction

Table 221 Four Promotions for Green Port Construction

Promotion Program

(Green Port type) Activities

Low-Carbon

Self-Sufficiency Port

Eco-friendly inland transportation system building

New renewable resources power equipment utilization

AMP LED utilization

The Disaster Safety

Port

Disaster Prevention environment infrastructure building

Disaster prediction and corresponding system utilization

Eco-Friendly Port Beauty the port by green park planting and so on

Provide eco-friendly port building programs

Resource Recycling

Port

Port waste (silt soil) effectively recycling system

Establish resource recycling port paragon

As table1 shown each type of Green Port has a separate emphasis

Eco-friendly inland transportation system which encourages utilizing rail canal

barge clean system reduces the truck application amount AMP means

Alternative Maritime Power supply system replaces with ship power generation

The Green Port construction in most of counties is the low-carbon self-sufficiency

12

port And in their construction maybe add a few other type promote director like

beauty the port by green park planting and so on

However in this study the Green Port concept is a comprehensive plan among

4 types not a specialization system

23 Green Port Construction Situation in major countries

After ltKyoto protocolgt having brought out each department began to take

affords on the reducing the GHG (greenhouse gas) emission In port department

the activities are embodied in the Green Port construction In this study many

major ports in US EU Japan and Korea are chose to explain for research

231 US

① LALB Port

In order to achieve to reduce marine pollutants standby and build clean port

LALB Port standby resource ministry and environment protection ministry

signed a 5year plan on clean standby action cooperation

This promotion business plan set a set of marine pollutants standby emission

limitation on the ship department from the statistics year 2006-2007 to 2010-2011

handling department heavy duty equipment truck department and so on Such as

13

in Green Port Technology construction department measures and programs are

shown in following Table

Table231 the details of LALB Port Green Port Promotion Programs

Promotion Program

Heavy Equipment Truck

Heavy Equipment

Replace and Update Aging Facilities

Substitute Fuels and Clean Fuel Incentives

Budgetary for the Development of Substitute Fuels

Marine Vessels Tugs

Ship Speed Reduction within the Port

Electrical supply of parking in the Berth

Use low-sulfur fuel (supplementary motor)

Handling Equipment

Air Quality Monitoring

Measure ambient air pollution levels in the vicinity of

the Port

Include a number of real-time air quality measurements

On the restrict situation of heavy equipment trucks and others vessels must to

be replaced and rebuilt in order to minimum the emission of NOx And the trucks

which donrsquot reach the regulate standard do not allowed to get in the port These

regulations will help their owner to replace and update trucks and also set up a

replacement plan to 16000 aging trucks make the replace done by 2012 As

foundation repaired the cargo owner must to pay an addition tax about 20ft 35$

40ft 79$

14

In the maritime department the speed reduction incentive took action in

Jan2005 When ship entry into the port boundary speed must be reduced under

20 miles 12kont At the beginning the effect of this plan is very clearly so the

limitation may be raised to 40mile And AMP (Alternative Maritime Power ) is

encouraged to be built and developed as to ship use their engine and get GHG

emission

② New York- New Jersey Port

The New York- New Jersey Port Authority brought out environment policy on

CO2 emission reduction The main concepts as following first reduce PX SOX

3 each year and CO2 5 Second ship must utilize sulfur-low fuel as a

obligation Third AMP is provided Forth modern the unloading and loading

equipment must be built Fifth promote trucks replacement Sixth reform the ship

engine Seventh invent 9 billion dollars in the following 10 years Eighth invent

to all hybrid equipment (325) Ninth install the hybrid truck in AMPT and

NYCT

③ Seattle Port

15

In Seattle Port Air Environment Maritime Improvement plan has been

accepted in 2005 The plan includes first set up Puget Sound Maritime Air

Forum and make one AMP provide services for two tour ships second change

the diesel hybrid equipment into electric utilization Third use bio-diesel and

diesel catalyst and reduce the emission Forth emphasize the standard and plan of

truck minimum the idling time

Seattle Port Tacoma Port and Vancouver made a assignment and promote

ldquoNorthwest Ports Clean Air Strategyrdquo

④ Auckland Port

Auckland Port set up the aging replacement plan in 2008 and invent 20 milion

dollars gas emission should reach the level And cargo transport system in port

hinterland port authority and Air environment management committee make

cooperation and give an incentive to truck which use new clean technology

Table232 Short term and Long term Green Port Plans in Auckland Port

16

17

232 EU

Rotterdam Port

As the biggest Port in EU Rotterdam Port takes more affords in reducing the

CO2 emission Main programs are low carbon footprint AMP and so on The

limitation of CO2 emission reduces down 50 of 1990 by 2025

In July 2008 the authority of Rotterdam port gave international cooperation

with other ports an extra boost by organizing the World Ports Climate Conference

During this conference the authority of Rotterdam discussed possible ways in

which ports and business could reduce air pollution and CO2 emissions The

proposals the authority of Rotterdam was set out in a declaration which was

supported by all 55 port cities attending the conference The conference resulted

in five projects to improve air quality and reduce CO2 emissions The authority of

Rotterdam is behind the project to further elaborate an Environmental Ship Index

The Rotterdam Climate Initiative is a joint venture with the municipality of

Rotterdam DCMR Environmental Protection Agency Rijnmond and Deltalinqs

Common goal is to halve CO2 emissions in the region by 2025 in comparison with

1990 levels In connection with the Rotterdam Climate Initiative the port works

on (together with DCMR and others) creating an infrastructure for the capture

18

transport and storage of CO2 A business case presented in the summer of 2008 is

now being elaborated into a business plan The business case concludes that

Rotterdam can begin in 2015 with the capture transport and underground storage

of five million tons of CO2 per annum This means that the basic infrastructure

will then be in place for further growth in capture and storage to twenty million

tons in 2025

In 2008 a start was made on the development of a sustainability index for

activities relating to the P for Planet (environment) In 2009 it will further expand

the index to cover the P for People and the P for Profit In the first phase of the

sustainability index CO2 footprint sustainable purchasing sustainable building

and sustainable land allocation will be covered

233 Japan

① Tacoma Port

In the Tacoma Port there are some programs on protecting the air water and

soil environment

In the air protection department ldquoNorthwest Ports Clean Air Strategyrdquo

ldquoGreen Gateway for Traderdquo and ldquoTruck Programrdquo had brought out to against air

pollution The concepts include using ultra-low sulfur diesel bio-diesel and other

cleaner-burning fuels in cargo-handling equipment using low-sulfur distillate

19

fuels at berth adding ldquogreen designrdquo environmental features to ships including

diesel-electric motors that save up to 30 percent in fuel and significantly reduce

emissions setting targets to change older less-efficient truck engines installing

anti-idling devices on rail-switching engines as well as partnering on other

innovative technological advance

The Port of Tacomarsquos four dockside rail yards move cargo quickly and

efficiently from container terminals They also reduce the number of trucks on

city streets and highways Each full train that leaves the Port represents 250 to 300

trucks not on our roads reducing roadway congestion and diesel emissions The

lowest emission route to ship cargo from Asia to the US Midwest is through the

Puget Sound according to the results of a study by Herbert Engineering released

in May 2009

And in the land protection program there are successful clean projects open

spaces and future habitat restoration In 2007 the Port purchased about 70 acres

of open space known as Juliarsquos Gulch and Storey Pit located between the

Tideflats and residential Northeast Tacoma Monitor water quality system is in

utilization in the water department in Tacoma Port

② Tokyo Port

In the Tokyo Port Green Port programs are almost similar with Tacoma Port

e-RTGC (Rubber Tired Gantry Crane) the barge between Tokyo and Yocohama

20

which shorten international maritime container cargo transportation land distance

super eco-shipbuilding technology dissemination and promotion green business

certification operation and shippers and logistics companies support cooperation

③ Osaka Port and Hakata Port

AMP electrical power equipment and solar power equipment are in utilization in

Osaka Port E-RTGC and solar power of refrigerated container are in utilization in

the Hakata Port

234 Korea

In Busan Port a set of Green Port took implementation such as LNG truck

E-RTGC equipment utilization eco-friendly transport means conversion (rail

canal barge) and GHG emission reduction obligation Table233

21

ltTable 233gt Summary of the Main Port of Green Port Measures

COUNTRY PORT MEASURES

US

LALB Port

Green flag AMP discharge gas reduction obligation

recommends use of alternative fuels and clean fuel

funding for the development of alternative fuels facilities

by new engine development instead of NOx emissions

green truck program (reduce70-80) low-sulfur fuel

utilization restore and revitalize the Los Cerritos

Wetlands

New York

Port

AMP modernized facilities utilization high speed hybrid

yard

Auckland

Port

Incentives on the new cleaning technology containers

transportation system

Seattle Port

AMP green ship membership Tier 4 level reducing PM

by 1994 level Smart Way program Northwest Ports

Clean Air Strategy

EU Rotterdam

Port

Clean engine (barge) green ship membership carbon

footprint calculation cruise ship which under port

authority change to use low-sulfur fuel low emission

engine development and utilization Green Award AMP

ship recycling incentives

Japan

Tokyo Port

RTGC (Rubber Tired Gantry Crane) apply for the barge

between Tokyo and Yocohama shorten international

maritime container cargo transportation land distance

super eco-shipbuilding technology dissemination and

promotion green business certification operation

shippers and logistics companies support cooperation

Osaka Port AMP electrical power equipment solar power equipment

Hakata Port E-RTGC solar power utilization in refrigerated container

Korea Busan Port

LNG truck E-RTGC eco-friendly transport means

conversion (rail canal barge) GHG emission reduction

obligation

22

24 Green Port Indicators Research

As the previous section list shown Green Port measures and programs are

substantially the same

When a ship entry in the port boundary from voyage many ports give a

incentive on shifting and utilizing sulfur-low fuel and reducing the speed under

20 miles when the ship berth in the port the alternative maritime power are

provided which replace its power generation

Next in the cargo unloading and loading department the same with above

utilization of sulfur-low fuel and electrical equipment are promoted and

eco-driving education to driver is necessary what speed is fuel fully burning and

emission minimum point

In the cargo transport department in other words truck department the

replacement on aging trucks is popular in many ports aging trucks are prohibited

close to port at the same time an incentive or support function are provided on

aging replacement The automated equipments are recommended to utilize in the

Green Port like hybrid yard tractor And a perfect plan on truck running also could

reduce the idling time and against the emission of CO2

The details reference the following Table 241

23

Table241 Green Port measures in port each department

Emission reduction programs

Ship

department

Shipping

in the

port

boundary

Obligation on the utilization of sulfur-low fuel

Reform ship engine and utilize hybrid

Speed reduce in the port entrance(a off-shore fee

incentive)

Off-shore AMP

Shift utilization system of clean fuel

Unloading and loading

department

Obligation on the utilization of sulfur-low fuel

Replace electrical equipment

Eco-driving

Truck department Hybrid yard tractor utilization

Promote aging truck replacement

Minimum the idling time

Others LED light in the Port

Develop renew and recycle resource energy

The Green Port measures in this study are e-RTGC AMP AGV Green Ship

certification system incentives on the new clean technology Green Flag(speed

reduction incentive)eco-friendly transport means conversion joint distribution

the cost on account of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction polities and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

The details and definition on each Green Port measure and the relationship with

Port Competitiveness will be expressed in next chapter

24

Chapter 3 The Relationship between Port

Competitiveness and Green Port Construction

31 Port Competitiveness Literature Review

Although past studies on port selection models have focused on port selection

made by port facilities port services port rates and charge and location

Murphy made a survey between 534 shipping companies and port authorities in

1989 and between 1850 shipping companies and port authorities in 1992

Comparing with other papers Murphys got a survey among more widely

objects In his paper port selection(port competitiveness) was seen to affected by

facilities situation appropriate pilotage max ship entrance probability the

25

capability of handling non-regular cargos whether to provide information of ship

nationality or not and port services level

In French model (1979) there are two factors affecting the port selection (port

competitiveness) endogenous factor and exogenous factor In endogenous factors

there are adequacy and physical plant condition of terminal facilities terminal rate

and charges frequency and geographic coverage of ship and freight services the

capacity of connecting to inland rails or transport net and the services provides for

the shipping or logistics And exogenous factors included the size and economic

capacity of hinterland as a source exports or market for imports national

economic situation trade policy and support established by government the

situation at home and abroad

The same as Frenchs paper in Paters paper in 1990 there are endogenous and

exogenous factors too In endogenous there are the services provides for the

shipping or logistics capacity of terminal facilities situation and condition of

facilities operation strategies established by port authority convenience to utilize

And the political situation at home and abroad social change economic factor

stabilized labor and capital However in 2004 there is a tremendous change in

Peters new paper There are four parts multi-modal process interface transport

modes infrastructure Multi-model Process part includes ship entrance rapid

speed and accuracy shipper and shipping companies reactive operation flexibility

Interface includes labor power information technology and so on And there are

26

ship calls frequency and amount of fleet factors in the transport modes part In the

infrastructure part includes port facility equipments and so on

Port facilities rates and charges services inland situation and social

circumstance factors affect the port selection and competitiveness a lot from the

research until 1992 by Murphy And in Lirn and Pater research 2003-2004 the

new and detail factors are shown to us

We can clearly see the contents in next table

27

Table 311 Prevention literature research results

Influence factors

French

(1979)

Endogenous

port facilities port rate and charges calls frequency port services

port connection with inland

Exogenous

economic size of hinterland national economic situation trade

policy home and abroad situation

Willingale

(1982)

voyage distance economy size entrance to port and route port

facilities max ship entrance probability port operation rates and

charges port authority scale of port

Slack

(1985)

cost of inland transportation port proximity ship demurrage

multi-transport

Peter

(1990)

Endogenous

port facilities condition of facilities operation strategies

convenience to utilize

Exogenous

political situation social change economic factor stabilized labor

and capital

UNCTAD

(1992)

port facilities services location level of financial industry

information communication system social circumstances economic

stability

Murphy

(1992)

facilities situation appropriate pilotage max ship entrance

probability the capability of handling non-regular cargos whether to

provide information of ship nationality or not port services level

Lirn

(2003-2004)

physical and technologic facilities geopolitical location port

operation and management shipping and terminal cost

Peter

(2004)

Multi-modal Process

ship entrance rapid speed and accuracy shipper and shipping

companies reactive operation flexibility

Interface labor and capital

Transport modes ship calls frequency and amount of fleet factors

28

And there are many experts and scholars research for the influence factors to

port selection and competitiveness in Korea The specific content follows table5

Table 312 Literature research in Korean academia

Influence factors

Jeon Il-su (1992) location facilities charges service level (EDI) terminal operation

port authority

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

( 1993 )

location facilities throughput charges service operation

situation

Kim Hak-so

(1993)

export shipping amount of annual cost of each ton of cargo

marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km of

cargo loading time

import marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km

of cargo amount of liner ship

Yeo Gi-tae (1996) location facilities throughput charge service operation situation

Ha Dong-u amp

Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

location facilities service level logistics charges environment of

logistics service

Yeo Gi-tae (1999) location facilities throughput charges service

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

throughput quay length yard area GNP

Kum Jong-su

(2001)

distance between port and cargo site terminal facilities service

the capacity of multi-transport capacity of cargo handling

administrative service rates and charges of inland transport

congestion

Yeo Gi-tae (2002) location throughput facilities service level

Kim Jin-gu (2002) port facilities location cargo amount rates and charges services

29

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005)

voyage degree to attract cargo cargo handling cost amount of

handling cargo connection to inland service reliability location

berth availability quay length feeder network depth

transshipment volumes cargo security profitability

offing degree to attract cargo berth availability cargo handling

cost transshipment volumes

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005)

cargo handling amount port facilities location rates and charges

level of service

Heo Yun-su

(2005)

port facilities rates and charges services marketing geopolitics

location economic and social circumstance

Kim Geun-seop

(2007)

port services facilities cargo handling amount location cost

productivity factor global factor

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) rates and charges services port characteristics

Many experts and scholars make a research on port selection and

competitiveness recently But the factors selection criteria are difference

Nevertheless the main factors are facilities services cost and so on

Therefore port competitiveness factors which chose in this study are port

facilities port services port rates and charges and social circumstance

However the main factors are not the whole factors any more more and more

detail factors and characteristic factors appearance Port selection and

competitiveness factors have changed And the development content is introduced

in next part

30

32 Port Competitiveness Development Tree

As mentioned above port facilities port rates and charges and port location are

the basic factors in the port selection and competitiveness

From the following table we can discover that first one facilities rates and

charges and location are the most important factor in port selection and

competitiveness second one the importance of social circumstance turns larger

inland connection is necessary all the time

Table 321 Main factor in the Pretentious Research

31

port facilities rates and

charges

inland

connection

social

circumstance location

French (1979) radic radic radic

Wiliingale (1982) radic radic

Slack (1985) radic

Pater (1990) radic radic

UNCTAD (1992) radic radic radic

Murphy(1992) radic

Jeon Il-su (1992) radic radic radic

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

(1993)

radic radic radic

Kim Hak-so

(1993) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1996) radic radic radic

Ha Dong-u

amp Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1998) radic radic radic

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

radic

Kum Jong-su

(2001) radic radic radic radic

Kim Jin-gu(2002) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(2002) radic radic

Lirn(2003-2004) radic radic radic

Pater(2004) radic

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005) radic radic radic

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005) radic radic radic

Heo Yun-su

(2005) radic radic radic radic

Kim Geun-seop

(2007) radic radic radic radic

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) radic

32

33 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green

Port Construction

Following the research above Port facilities rates and charges inland

connection and social circumstance are chose in this study port selection and

competitiveness department

e-RTGC Electric rubber tired gantry crane is a mobile gantry crane used for

stacking intermodal containers within the stacking areas of a container terminal

e-RTGC are used at container terminals and container storage yards to straddling

multiple lanes of railroad and container storage or when maximum storage

density in the container stack is desired

AMP is shorted for Alternative Marine Power and Itrsquos a facility which

provides the electric system in the land for ship which entry in the port The

facility can reduce emissions which ship get entrance in the port

AGV is a mobile robot that follows markers or wires in the floor or uses

vision or lasers They are most often used in industrial applications to move

materials around a manufacturing facility or a warehouse Automatic Guided

Vehicle systems work around-the-clock making continuous flow and just-in-time

delivery easier to achieve Application of the automatic guided vehicle has broade

33

ned during the late 20th century and they are no longer restricted to industrial

environments

The e-RTGC AMP and AGV are the new clean facilities and equipments in the

Green Port they donrsquot reduce the efficiency of handling cargo and they also

reduce the CO2 emission account

Green ship certification system if a ship utilizes clean and CO2 emission

reduction technology on the ship building adds equipment and management and

son on certification would be received And the port authority gives some

incentive and preferential treatment among 45 ports Such as a better schedule is

provided for green membership ship priority in handing cargo and discount on

entrance fee

Incentives on the new cleaning technology There are two expressions about

this measure one is that the port authority give a incentive to ship which have a

great utilization on the new cleaning technology and the other one is that

environment provide many incentives to the authority which utilize the new

cleaning technology in the port such as LED street lamp solar power cranes

Green flag The Green Flag incentive program was set up to encourage ships to

slow down in order to improve air quality The Green Flag program provides

approximately $2 million a year in discounts for vessel operators who slow their

ships to 12 knots (22kmh) or less within 20miles (32km) of the harbor

34

According to the Port the Green Flag program reduced air pollution by 600tons in

2007 and is expected to do better in 2008

All of Green ship certification system incentives on the new cleaning

technology and Green Flag are incentives provided for users of port and aimed at

reduce port rates and charges So the 3 measures belong to affect port rates and

charges

Eco-friendly transport means conversion Eco-friendly means of transport are

much accounted of green port for example railway discharge less GHG emission

than truck barge with a clean engine among the river and inshore canal

Joint distribution joint distribution is a collaborative system which port

provides among many logistics companies It can make the cargo handling speed

rapidly and reduce cargo storage time for CO2 emission reducing such as

refrigerated container In an addition it also makes the logistics companies

transport more efficient

Cost on amount of CO2 emission differenced from other port the cost on

amount of CO2 is included in the port cost The cost aims to reduce the CO2

emission directly

CO2 emission reduction policies compared with other traditional port Green

Port gives more cost discount and incentives but in an addition there are many

policies on CO2 emission restriction Such as aging trucks restrictions in inland

transport department ship entry speed reduced and fuel changed in the ship

35

department and so on Whether these restriction policies constrain port

development or not and the degree of these policies constrain port development

will be explain by the AHP results

Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors some ports in the

western countries are opened as a travel place for visitors so as to change the

polluted impress and raise the position in our heart

Cost on amount of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction policies and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors can affect the social

circumstance factor Whether these measures can or not improve the social

circumstance and port competitiveness we have to see the next calculation and

results

36

Chapter 4 The Green Port Competitiveness

Analysis

41 The Green Port Competitiveness Model by AHP

The AHP is one multi-criteria decision making method which has been

extensively applied to a variety of decision-making situations The multi-criteria

techniques are considered to be a promising framework for evaluation of

decision-making factors since they have the potential to take into account

conflicting multidimensional incommensurable and uncertain effects of

decisions explicitly

In order to apply the AHP method a hierarchical decision schema was

constructed by decomposing the decision problem into its decision elements

37

After that the importance or preferences of the decision elements are examined in

a pair-wise comparison to the elements in the hierarchy The parameters are

estimated using pair-wise comparisons between the importance of the attribute or

decision element in the function using data made by each responder Making

comparisons is a question of which of the two attributes is more import as well as

how much more important

Follow these theories the Green Port Competitiveness Model choose factors as

follow in port competitiveness factors part there are port facilities port rates and

charges inland connection social circumstance in Green Port construction part

there are e-RTGC AMP AGV green ship certification system green flag

incentives on the new cleaning technology eco-friendly transport means

conversion joint distribution CO2 emission reduction policies cost on amount of

CO2 emission beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

38

Figure 41 Green Port Competitiveness AHP model

Follow the Green Port Competitiveness AHP as shown we set a questionnaire

survey to many experts scholars working in logistics system area And we got 15

ones and 14 ones results are believable and integrated

42 Green Port Competitiveness Analysis

39

The key to construction of the factors which affects the port competitiveness

is to determine the conceptual model The selection of the factors directly affects

the evaluation of the result In order to ensure the accuracy objectivity and

practicality of evaluation results the following basic principles must be followed

when selecting factors systematic principles the principle of universal

comparability practical principle and goal-oriented principle In view of the

foregoing the competitiveness which affected by Green Port construction model

is made The analysis follows established principles of port competitiveness

evaluation taking into account the characteristics and functions of the port as well

as port facilities port services port rates and charges ship entrance inland

connection social circumstances and so on

(1) Port facilities

e-RTGC U11 AMP U12 AGV U13

(2) Port rates and charges

Green ship certification system U21 Incentives on the new clean

technology U22 Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

(3) Inland connection

Eco-friendly means of transport U31 Joint distribution U32

(4) Social circumstances

40

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41 CO2 emission reduction policies

U42 Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors U43

Table 421 Details of Level I and Level II values

Level I

indicators Symbol Level II indicators Symbol

Port facilities A1

e-RTGC U11

AMP U12

AGV U13

Port rates and

charges A2

Green ship certification system U21

Incentives on the new clean technology U22

Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

Inland

connection A3

Eco-friendly means of transport U31

Joint distribution U32

Social

circumstances A4

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41

CO2 emissions reduction policies U42

Beautiful environment construction in inner

harbors U43

41

I Determination of level I indicator weights

As the ports competitiveness evaluation indicators at this level are complex

and the elements are not easily quantified AHP is adopted to determine the

indicator weights with the basic steps as follows

(1) Establish a comparative judgment matrix The comparative judgment

matrix is obtained through comparing contributed proportion of multiple

indicators to the overall target by the judgment scale wherein the fuzzy

judgment number introduced is 1 3 5 7 and 9 and the reciprocal of

such number indicates the important degree of one element relatively to

another The results are shown in next table

Table 422 Comparison matrix of level I indicators

A1 A2 A3 A4

A1 1 15 13 3

A2 5 1 3 7

A3 3 13 1 5

A4 13 17 15 1

(2) Calculate the characteristic vector of the comparative judgment matrix

which refers to the weighted vector of the indicator The writer adopts

42

the geometric method to calculate the characteristic vector The

calculated result is as follows

ω=(012 0560 026 006)T λmax=418 It can be obtained from the table

RI=09 Wherein ω is the characteristic vector corresponding to the

maximum characteristic value λmax of the comparative judgment matrix

namely the weighted vector of the indicator RI is the average

consistency indicator as shown in following table

Table423 Average random consistency indicator RI

Matrix Order

RI

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

0 0 058 09 112 124 132 141

Matrix Order

RI

9 10 11 12 13 14 15

145 149 152 154 156 158 159

(3) Conduct consistency check on the comparative judgment matrix Adopt

the random consistency proportion CR to judge the consistency of the

comparative judgment matrix According to CI= (λmax -n)(n-1) and

CR=CIRI it can be obtained through calculation CR=007lt01 Thus

this comparative judgment matrix has a satisfactory consistency and the

indicator weight coefficient calculated through this matrix is acceptable

43

II Determination of level II indicator weights

The data at this level are the details of level Ⅰ indicator The judgment

matrix obtained through comparing multiple sub-indicators under Level Ⅰ

indicators is adopted to determine the weights of sub-indicators under each

indicator one by one The specific steps are as follows

(1) The experts score the weights within the given range To determine the

weights of several small indicators under the same big indicator it is

supposed that the score of small indicator ｋ under the indicator j made

by the expert i is Xijk wherein i=12n n is the total number of

experts ј=12m m is the total number of LevelⅡ indicator к

=12Oj Oj is the number of small indicators under the big indicator ј

іјк IJK LRC l I j k

(2) The credit rating of the expert і is l l =1 2 3 l =1 indicates this expert

is quite familiar with the evaluated contents l =2 indicator this expert is

44

with the evaluated contents l =3 indicates this expert is not quite familiar

with the evaluated contents yi1 is the=08 yi2 =05 and yi3=1

(3) The comprehensive evaluation score of small indicator l under the

indicator j is as follows

(4) The formula for normalization processing of indicator weights is as

follows and the absolute weight of the indicator set is marked as

q=(q1q2q11)

(5) Because of the same justification and principle we donrsquot give the detail

about the calculation The same with the level Ⅰ calculation we

manipulation data one by one and get 14 results And obtain the average

45

results by weighted average method The results detail as Table for the

final weights of Level-Ⅱ evaluation indicators

Above the calculation process and method are just one of data from the

questionable surveys In this study the final results are got from the

weighted average by the results of each questionable survey

The final results are shown as Table424

Table424 Indicator weights table of indicator system

Level I

indicators Weight LevelⅡ indicators

Relative

weight

Absolute

weight

Importance

percentage

Port Facilities

A1 02735

e-RTGC U11 05506 01506 1506

AMP U12 01648 00451 451

AGV U13 02826 00773 773

Port Rates and

Charges A2

02902

Green ship certification s

ystem U21 04724 01371 1371

Incentives on the new

clean technology U22 02871 00833 833

Green Flag (speed

reduction incentive)U23 02405 00698 698

Inland

connection A3

02865

Eco-friendly means of

transport U31 05942 01702 1702

Joint distribution U32 04058 01163 1163

Social

environmentA4 00863

Cost on amount of CO2

emission U41 03698 00319 319

CO2 emissions reduction

policies U42 02273 00196 196

Beautiful environment

construction in inner

harbors U43

04029 00348 348

46

III Case study

In the questionable survey we also got the mark of Green Port measures

evaluation value of many main ports such as Singapore Port Shanghai Port

Hongkong Port Busan Port LALB Port Rotterdam Port and Yocohama Port

The highest mark is 5 and lowest one is 1

Table425 Evaluation value of many main ports

Singapore

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

LALB

Port

Rotterdam

Port

Yocohama

Port

Port facilities 38000 36000 34000 38182 38000 42000 32000

Port rates and

charges 32000 36000 31000 35455 32000 39000 33000

Inland

connection 39000 34545 35000 29091 35000 45000 36000

Social

circumstance 42000 32727 41000 32000 38000 42727 36000

With the Green Port and Port competitiveness indicator weights results these

ports got the final evaluation value

47

Table426 Final evaluation value on main ports Green Port measures and

competitiveness

Rotterdam

Port

Singapore

Port

LALB

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

Yocohama

Port

394 345 330 330 319 318 317

43 Results Analysis

From the results table we can obtain the many results as following

① The main Green Port measures which are more important to improve port

competitiveness are Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system the indicator weights are 01702 01506 and

01371 among the 11 indicators

② In the Green Port construction Cost on amount of CO2 emission and CO2

emissions reduction policies are the restrictions indicators but the weight

of two indicators are not big 00319 and 00196 So effect on Green Port

construction to port competitiveness does have the weaken capacity but

not clearly strengthen more clearly Thus Green Port construction really

could improve the port competitiveness

48

③ In the case study traditional ports Rotterdam and Singapore Port give us

better examples on Green Port construction especially Rotterdam Port

④ Hongkong Busan and Yocohama Port all got a lower evaluation value

But in detail Hongkong and Yocohama Port got a lower on the port

facilities and rates and charges Busan Port got a higher on the port

facilities and rates and charges but a lower on the inland connection and

social circumstance

⑤ Shanghai Port doesnrsquot have Particular strength factors but the

comprehensive strength is not bad the same as LALB Port

49

Chapter 5 Conclusion

In this thesis the effects of Green Port construction for improving the port

competitiveness have been studied Under the definition of Green Port the

characteristics of Green Port and its effects has been shown by analysing the AHP

method which based on the questionary survey for Green Port specialists and port

officers

Follow the results of analysis on Green Port competitiveness AHP model

Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green ship certification system is

better for Green Port Construction welcome for shipping companies and citizens

who live around the port And in the analysis of Port competitiveness factors port

rates and charges always affects port competitiveness a lot As a trend inland

connection factor abstracts more attention of shipping companies

50

On the trend of port department each port should take a activity to adjust

strategy for improving its competitiveness Such as in the main ports evaluation

Busan port get a high value on port rates and charges and port facilities but as a

lower value on inland connection factor the final value is not as well as we look

forward In the evaluation of Singapore Port through it gets a lower value on rates

and charges higher value on inland connection and social circumstance causes the

final value are better So the Green Port Construction may be a trend in port

department

In the results of this thesis Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system are better solutions for Green Port Construction And

especially it can be verified that the port rates and charges always affects port

competitiveness Futhermore the investment for Green Port construction and its

effects have to be verified in the future

51

References

1 Hoyle B S and Smith J 1992 Transport and Development In Modern

transport geography edited by B S Hoyle R D Knowles (London Belhaven

Press)pp11-31

2 Beresford A K C De Souza A J R G and Pettit S J 2005 Stategic

development of liner shipping companies and terminal operators Ocean yearbook

19(Chicago 1L The University of Chicago Press) pp 732-750

3 Heaver T D 2002 Supply chain and logistics management implications for

liner shipping In The handbook of maritime economics and business edited by C

Grammenos (LondonLLP) pp 375-396

4 Park T E (2011) A Study on selection criteria of Green Port and evaluation of

major Korean port A masters thesis of graduate school of Incheon university

52

5 JeongBH (2009)Green port management policy directions in the green

growth era- The case of Gwangyang port in Republic of Korea Journal of Korea

Port Economic Association Vol25(3) p361-384

6 Lee J S Han N H(2009) A study on Green Port Revitalization According to

Air Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

7 Lee Y K Nan J W(2010)Green Logistics Policy Analysis and Implications

of Japan

8 Lee B S (2010)Tendency and Countermeasures on Green Logistics in Port

Logistics Company A masters thesis of graduate school of Korean Maritime

university

9 Lee J S (2009) A Study on Green Port Revitalization According to Air

Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

10 Zhang F Y Li Z Lu X J Yao X L(2008)Competitiveness of Inland

Ports Based on F-AHP

11 Port of Long Beach (2009) Green Port Policy wwwpolbcom

12 The port of Los Angeles wwwportoflosangelesorg

3

Compared with other departments green policy in port department is explained

as green maritime and green shipping For example super-eco ship building and

Modal Shift promotion

The same aim to Hong Kong Ports AMP E-RTG hybrid truck bio-diesel

recycling energy CNG LNG and development are in utilization

ldquoGreen Growth Policyrdquo is the measure which brought out by the Korean

government Follow this strategy Korean port authority also takes out the ldquoGreen

Port building comprehensive planrdquo Furthermore low carbon self-sufficiency port

the disaster safety port eco-friendly port and resource recycling port are the

understandings on the Korean ldquoGreen Growth Policyrdquo

As the port support policies being changed port competitiveness factors are

changed Especially the importance degree of each factor has been changed a

lot The purpose of this study is explaining the competitiveness effects changed

which taking Green Port measures and programs port and give a better advice and

suggestion to Green Port construction

12 Scope and structure of research

The method to analysis the effects of Green Port construction for improving

port competitiveness is AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process)

4

And research process in this study is shown in ltFigure 1gt

ltFigure 1gt Research process

In chapter 1 research background and objective research method and process

are included And chapter 2 introduces the Green Port construction background

definition the Green Port construction situation in many countries and each

department introduction in Green Port construction The chapter 3 views the

literature on port competitiveness and obtains the influence factors used in this

study trend and relationship between port competitiveness The chapter 4 based

5

on the survey data and calculates each indicator importance degree by AHP

method and analysis the result Finally in chapter 5 the conclusion summary the

whole study by the result analysis

6

Chapter 2 Green Port Construction Situation

21 Green Port Construction Background

As the United Nations Secretary General has said the greatest challenge which

we are facing is environmental regulators It is a growing crisis with economic

health and safety food production security and other dimensions

The Kyoto Protocol is an international agreement linked to the United Nations

Framework Convention on Climate Change The major feature of the Kyoto

Protocol is that it sets binding targets for 37 industrialized countries and the

European community for reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to fight

global warming These amount to an average of five percent bellow 1990 level

over the five-year period 2008-2012

The protocol was initially adopted on 11 December 1997 in Japan but all of the

member countries entered into force on16 February 2005 The Kyoto Protocol

7

was adopted in Kyoto Japan on 11 December 1997 and entered into force on 16

February 2005 The detailed rules for the implementation of the Protocol were

adopted at COP 7 in Marrakesh in 2001 and are called the ldquoMarrakesh Accordsrdquo

Follow the ltKyoto Protocolgt several flexible mechanisms are allowed Such

as emissions trading the clean development mechanism (CDM) and joint

implementation The mechanisms allow AnnexⅠcounties to meet their GHG

emission limitations by purchasing GHG emission reductions credits from

elsewhere through financial exchanges projects that reduce emissions in

non-Annex Ⅰ countries or Annex Ⅰ countries with excess allowances The

mechanisms help stimulate green investment and help Parties meet their emission

targets in a cost-effective way

Therefore many countries take action on reducing the GHG discharge emission

For example increase the energy utilization efficiency develop the solar power

wind energy tidal energy and other clean energy in their industry The details

about objective of GHG emission reduction in main countries are displayed as the

following ltTable 1gt

8

ltTable 1gt Objective of CO2 reduce in main countries

Bench

mark of

Year

Objective

()

Absolute

quantity

()

Remark

EU 1990 20~30 -20~-30 Norway New Zealand 40 reducing

USA 2005 17 -3 Passed by House of Representatives

Japan 1990 25 -25 On the premise of attention with China

India

Korea 2020

(BAU) 30 mdashmdash

Discharge amount is up to 564million don

in estimation

China 2005 40~50 60~150

(2005) Each GDP

India 2005 20-25 mdashmdash With the developed countries

participation

Russia 1990 25 -25 Be neutral country

Norway 1990 30~40 -30~-40 mdashmdash

New

Zealand 1990 10~20 -10~ -20 mdashmdash

Austria 2000 5~25 -3~-11 mdashmdash

Canada 2003 20 -3 mdashmdash

Mexico 2002 50 mdashmdash With the developed countries

participation

South

Africa

2020

(BAU) 34 mdashmdash

With the developed countries

participation

Brazil 2020

(BAU) 36~39

-20

(2005) mdashmdash

(Korean Maritime Institute 20095)

9

22 The Definition of Green Port

As the global warming affecting in the world climate has been heavily changed

natural disaster frequently occurred natural resources depletion and supply

imbalance cause crisis to reach a high level For the purpose of getting away from

financial crisis and creating the new growth motivity the counties in the world

make more efforts on developing economic

Because of the realization of this global climate and environment crisis Korean

government had brought out the ldquoGreen Growth Policyrdquo And it made the ldquoGreen

Growth Policyrdquo be embodied and law-governed announced ldquoLow Carbon Green

Growth of the Basic Lawrdquo

In order to coordinate with this policy and law build up the ldquoGreen Growthrdquo

everyone make their efforts and reach ldquoGreen Growthrdquo in Korea each department

As a important industry department port authority also take activity to match the

national strategy of ldquoGreen Growthrdquo and draw up the plan on ldquoGreen Portrdquo

construction

However there isnrsquot a clear definition about the Green Port Korean Land

Transport and Maritime Ministry have explained the Green Port as follows Green

house gas Reducing Energy Effciencing Nature-friendly Port The explanation is

very easy to understand but from a professional point of view it not very

10

comprehensive and concrete So we have to understand the concept in the Green

Port Construction measures and programs There are about 4 kind explanation and

promotion programs in the Green Port Respectively the port which based on

green technology and green business creating new growth motive improving

living standards jumping in the ranks of the advanced port

ltFigure 2gt Green Port appearance and basic definition

In the Green Growth National Strategy Policy there are 10 pieces of policy

directions and 50 researches each department should choose the appropriate one

Follow these researches chose by port availability especially Low Carbon

11

Self-sufficiency Port The Disaster Safety Port Eco-friendly Port Resource

Recycling Port and in this study Green Port construction is a plan on

comprehensive and mix of 4kinds of Green Port Construction

Table 221 Four Promotions for Green Port Construction

Promotion Program

(Green Port type) Activities

Low-Carbon

Self-Sufficiency Port

Eco-friendly inland transportation system building

New renewable resources power equipment utilization

AMP LED utilization

The Disaster Safety

Port

Disaster Prevention environment infrastructure building

Disaster prediction and corresponding system utilization

Eco-Friendly Port Beauty the port by green park planting and so on

Provide eco-friendly port building programs

Resource Recycling

Port

Port waste (silt soil) effectively recycling system

Establish resource recycling port paragon

As table1 shown each type of Green Port has a separate emphasis

Eco-friendly inland transportation system which encourages utilizing rail canal

barge clean system reduces the truck application amount AMP means

Alternative Maritime Power supply system replaces with ship power generation

The Green Port construction in most of counties is the low-carbon self-sufficiency

12

port And in their construction maybe add a few other type promote director like

beauty the port by green park planting and so on

However in this study the Green Port concept is a comprehensive plan among

4 types not a specialization system

23 Green Port Construction Situation in major countries

After ltKyoto protocolgt having brought out each department began to take

affords on the reducing the GHG (greenhouse gas) emission In port department

the activities are embodied in the Green Port construction In this study many

major ports in US EU Japan and Korea are chose to explain for research

231 US

① LALB Port

In order to achieve to reduce marine pollutants standby and build clean port

LALB Port standby resource ministry and environment protection ministry

signed a 5year plan on clean standby action cooperation

This promotion business plan set a set of marine pollutants standby emission

limitation on the ship department from the statistics year 2006-2007 to 2010-2011

handling department heavy duty equipment truck department and so on Such as

13

in Green Port Technology construction department measures and programs are

shown in following Table

Table231 the details of LALB Port Green Port Promotion Programs

Promotion Program

Heavy Equipment Truck

Heavy Equipment

Replace and Update Aging Facilities

Substitute Fuels and Clean Fuel Incentives

Budgetary for the Development of Substitute Fuels

Marine Vessels Tugs

Ship Speed Reduction within the Port

Electrical supply of parking in the Berth

Use low-sulfur fuel (supplementary motor)

Handling Equipment

Air Quality Monitoring

Measure ambient air pollution levels in the vicinity of

the Port

Include a number of real-time air quality measurements

On the restrict situation of heavy equipment trucks and others vessels must to

be replaced and rebuilt in order to minimum the emission of NOx And the trucks

which donrsquot reach the regulate standard do not allowed to get in the port These

regulations will help their owner to replace and update trucks and also set up a

replacement plan to 16000 aging trucks make the replace done by 2012 As

foundation repaired the cargo owner must to pay an addition tax about 20ft 35$

40ft 79$

14

In the maritime department the speed reduction incentive took action in

Jan2005 When ship entry into the port boundary speed must be reduced under

20 miles 12kont At the beginning the effect of this plan is very clearly so the

limitation may be raised to 40mile And AMP (Alternative Maritime Power ) is

encouraged to be built and developed as to ship use their engine and get GHG

emission

② New York- New Jersey Port

The New York- New Jersey Port Authority brought out environment policy on

CO2 emission reduction The main concepts as following first reduce PX SOX

3 each year and CO2 5 Second ship must utilize sulfur-low fuel as a

obligation Third AMP is provided Forth modern the unloading and loading

equipment must be built Fifth promote trucks replacement Sixth reform the ship

engine Seventh invent 9 billion dollars in the following 10 years Eighth invent

to all hybrid equipment (325) Ninth install the hybrid truck in AMPT and

NYCT

③ Seattle Port

15

In Seattle Port Air Environment Maritime Improvement plan has been

accepted in 2005 The plan includes first set up Puget Sound Maritime Air

Forum and make one AMP provide services for two tour ships second change

the diesel hybrid equipment into electric utilization Third use bio-diesel and

diesel catalyst and reduce the emission Forth emphasize the standard and plan of

truck minimum the idling time

Seattle Port Tacoma Port and Vancouver made a assignment and promote

ldquoNorthwest Ports Clean Air Strategyrdquo

④ Auckland Port

Auckland Port set up the aging replacement plan in 2008 and invent 20 milion

dollars gas emission should reach the level And cargo transport system in port

hinterland port authority and Air environment management committee make

cooperation and give an incentive to truck which use new clean technology

Table232 Short term and Long term Green Port Plans in Auckland Port

16

17

232 EU

Rotterdam Port

As the biggest Port in EU Rotterdam Port takes more affords in reducing the

CO2 emission Main programs are low carbon footprint AMP and so on The

limitation of CO2 emission reduces down 50 of 1990 by 2025

In July 2008 the authority of Rotterdam port gave international cooperation

with other ports an extra boost by organizing the World Ports Climate Conference

During this conference the authority of Rotterdam discussed possible ways in

which ports and business could reduce air pollution and CO2 emissions The

proposals the authority of Rotterdam was set out in a declaration which was

supported by all 55 port cities attending the conference The conference resulted

in five projects to improve air quality and reduce CO2 emissions The authority of

Rotterdam is behind the project to further elaborate an Environmental Ship Index

The Rotterdam Climate Initiative is a joint venture with the municipality of

Rotterdam DCMR Environmental Protection Agency Rijnmond and Deltalinqs

Common goal is to halve CO2 emissions in the region by 2025 in comparison with

1990 levels In connection with the Rotterdam Climate Initiative the port works

on (together with DCMR and others) creating an infrastructure for the capture

18

transport and storage of CO2 A business case presented in the summer of 2008 is

now being elaborated into a business plan The business case concludes that

Rotterdam can begin in 2015 with the capture transport and underground storage

of five million tons of CO2 per annum This means that the basic infrastructure

will then be in place for further growth in capture and storage to twenty million

tons in 2025

In 2008 a start was made on the development of a sustainability index for

activities relating to the P for Planet (environment) In 2009 it will further expand

the index to cover the P for People and the P for Profit In the first phase of the

sustainability index CO2 footprint sustainable purchasing sustainable building

and sustainable land allocation will be covered

233 Japan

① Tacoma Port

In the Tacoma Port there are some programs on protecting the air water and

soil environment

In the air protection department ldquoNorthwest Ports Clean Air Strategyrdquo

ldquoGreen Gateway for Traderdquo and ldquoTruck Programrdquo had brought out to against air

pollution The concepts include using ultra-low sulfur diesel bio-diesel and other

cleaner-burning fuels in cargo-handling equipment using low-sulfur distillate

19

fuels at berth adding ldquogreen designrdquo environmental features to ships including

diesel-electric motors that save up to 30 percent in fuel and significantly reduce

emissions setting targets to change older less-efficient truck engines installing

anti-idling devices on rail-switching engines as well as partnering on other

innovative technological advance

The Port of Tacomarsquos four dockside rail yards move cargo quickly and

efficiently from container terminals They also reduce the number of trucks on

city streets and highways Each full train that leaves the Port represents 250 to 300

trucks not on our roads reducing roadway congestion and diesel emissions The

lowest emission route to ship cargo from Asia to the US Midwest is through the

Puget Sound according to the results of a study by Herbert Engineering released

in May 2009

And in the land protection program there are successful clean projects open

spaces and future habitat restoration In 2007 the Port purchased about 70 acres

of open space known as Juliarsquos Gulch and Storey Pit located between the

Tideflats and residential Northeast Tacoma Monitor water quality system is in

utilization in the water department in Tacoma Port

② Tokyo Port

In the Tokyo Port Green Port programs are almost similar with Tacoma Port

e-RTGC (Rubber Tired Gantry Crane) the barge between Tokyo and Yocohama

20

which shorten international maritime container cargo transportation land distance

super eco-shipbuilding technology dissemination and promotion green business

certification operation and shippers and logistics companies support cooperation

③ Osaka Port and Hakata Port

AMP electrical power equipment and solar power equipment are in utilization in

Osaka Port E-RTGC and solar power of refrigerated container are in utilization in

the Hakata Port

234 Korea

In Busan Port a set of Green Port took implementation such as LNG truck

E-RTGC equipment utilization eco-friendly transport means conversion (rail

canal barge) and GHG emission reduction obligation Table233

21

ltTable 233gt Summary of the Main Port of Green Port Measures

COUNTRY PORT MEASURES

US

LALB Port

Green flag AMP discharge gas reduction obligation

recommends use of alternative fuels and clean fuel

funding for the development of alternative fuels facilities

by new engine development instead of NOx emissions

green truck program (reduce70-80) low-sulfur fuel

utilization restore and revitalize the Los Cerritos

Wetlands

New York

Port

AMP modernized facilities utilization high speed hybrid

yard

Auckland

Port

Incentives on the new cleaning technology containers

transportation system

Seattle Port

AMP green ship membership Tier 4 level reducing PM

by 1994 level Smart Way program Northwest Ports

Clean Air Strategy

EU Rotterdam

Port

Clean engine (barge) green ship membership carbon

footprint calculation cruise ship which under port

authority change to use low-sulfur fuel low emission

engine development and utilization Green Award AMP

ship recycling incentives

Japan

Tokyo Port

RTGC (Rubber Tired Gantry Crane) apply for the barge

between Tokyo and Yocohama shorten international

maritime container cargo transportation land distance

super eco-shipbuilding technology dissemination and

promotion green business certification operation

shippers and logistics companies support cooperation

Osaka Port AMP electrical power equipment solar power equipment

Hakata Port E-RTGC solar power utilization in refrigerated container

Korea Busan Port

LNG truck E-RTGC eco-friendly transport means

conversion (rail canal barge) GHG emission reduction

obligation

22

24 Green Port Indicators Research

As the previous section list shown Green Port measures and programs are

substantially the same

When a ship entry in the port boundary from voyage many ports give a

incentive on shifting and utilizing sulfur-low fuel and reducing the speed under

20 miles when the ship berth in the port the alternative maritime power are

provided which replace its power generation

Next in the cargo unloading and loading department the same with above

utilization of sulfur-low fuel and electrical equipment are promoted and

eco-driving education to driver is necessary what speed is fuel fully burning and

emission minimum point

In the cargo transport department in other words truck department the

replacement on aging trucks is popular in many ports aging trucks are prohibited

close to port at the same time an incentive or support function are provided on

aging replacement The automated equipments are recommended to utilize in the

Green Port like hybrid yard tractor And a perfect plan on truck running also could

reduce the idling time and against the emission of CO2

The details reference the following Table 241

23

Table241 Green Port measures in port each department

Emission reduction programs

Ship

department

Shipping

in the

port

boundary

Obligation on the utilization of sulfur-low fuel

Reform ship engine and utilize hybrid

Speed reduce in the port entrance(a off-shore fee

incentive)

Off-shore AMP

Shift utilization system of clean fuel

Unloading and loading

department

Obligation on the utilization of sulfur-low fuel

Replace electrical equipment

Eco-driving

Truck department Hybrid yard tractor utilization

Promote aging truck replacement

Minimum the idling time

Others LED light in the Port

Develop renew and recycle resource energy

The Green Port measures in this study are e-RTGC AMP AGV Green Ship

certification system incentives on the new clean technology Green Flag(speed

reduction incentive)eco-friendly transport means conversion joint distribution

the cost on account of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction polities and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

The details and definition on each Green Port measure and the relationship with

Port Competitiveness will be expressed in next chapter

24

Chapter 3 The Relationship between Port

Competitiveness and Green Port Construction

31 Port Competitiveness Literature Review

Although past studies on port selection models have focused on port selection

made by port facilities port services port rates and charge and location

Murphy made a survey between 534 shipping companies and port authorities in

1989 and between 1850 shipping companies and port authorities in 1992

Comparing with other papers Murphys got a survey among more widely

objects In his paper port selection(port competitiveness) was seen to affected by

facilities situation appropriate pilotage max ship entrance probability the

25

capability of handling non-regular cargos whether to provide information of ship

nationality or not and port services level

In French model (1979) there are two factors affecting the port selection (port

competitiveness) endogenous factor and exogenous factor In endogenous factors

there are adequacy and physical plant condition of terminal facilities terminal rate

and charges frequency and geographic coverage of ship and freight services the

capacity of connecting to inland rails or transport net and the services provides for

the shipping or logistics And exogenous factors included the size and economic

capacity of hinterland as a source exports or market for imports national

economic situation trade policy and support established by government the

situation at home and abroad

The same as Frenchs paper in Paters paper in 1990 there are endogenous and

exogenous factors too In endogenous there are the services provides for the

shipping or logistics capacity of terminal facilities situation and condition of

facilities operation strategies established by port authority convenience to utilize

And the political situation at home and abroad social change economic factor

stabilized labor and capital However in 2004 there is a tremendous change in

Peters new paper There are four parts multi-modal process interface transport

modes infrastructure Multi-model Process part includes ship entrance rapid

speed and accuracy shipper and shipping companies reactive operation flexibility

Interface includes labor power information technology and so on And there are

26

ship calls frequency and amount of fleet factors in the transport modes part In the

infrastructure part includes port facility equipments and so on

Port facilities rates and charges services inland situation and social

circumstance factors affect the port selection and competitiveness a lot from the

research until 1992 by Murphy And in Lirn and Pater research 2003-2004 the

new and detail factors are shown to us

We can clearly see the contents in next table

27

Table 311 Prevention literature research results

Influence factors

French

(1979)

Endogenous

port facilities port rate and charges calls frequency port services

port connection with inland

Exogenous

economic size of hinterland national economic situation trade

policy home and abroad situation

Willingale

(1982)

voyage distance economy size entrance to port and route port

facilities max ship entrance probability port operation rates and

charges port authority scale of port

Slack

(1985)

cost of inland transportation port proximity ship demurrage

multi-transport

Peter

(1990)

Endogenous

port facilities condition of facilities operation strategies

convenience to utilize

Exogenous

political situation social change economic factor stabilized labor

and capital

UNCTAD

(1992)

port facilities services location level of financial industry

information communication system social circumstances economic

stability

Murphy

(1992)

facilities situation appropriate pilotage max ship entrance

probability the capability of handling non-regular cargos whether to

provide information of ship nationality or not port services level

Lirn

(2003-2004)

physical and technologic facilities geopolitical location port

operation and management shipping and terminal cost

Peter

(2004)

Multi-modal Process

ship entrance rapid speed and accuracy shipper and shipping

companies reactive operation flexibility

Interface labor and capital

Transport modes ship calls frequency and amount of fleet factors

28

And there are many experts and scholars research for the influence factors to

port selection and competitiveness in Korea The specific content follows table5

Table 312 Literature research in Korean academia

Influence factors

Jeon Il-su (1992) location facilities charges service level (EDI) terminal operation

port authority

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

( 1993 )

location facilities throughput charges service operation

situation

Kim Hak-so

(1993)

export shipping amount of annual cost of each ton of cargo

marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km of

cargo loading time

import marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km

of cargo amount of liner ship

Yeo Gi-tae (1996) location facilities throughput charge service operation situation

Ha Dong-u amp

Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

location facilities service level logistics charges environment of

logistics service

Yeo Gi-tae (1999) location facilities throughput charges service

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

throughput quay length yard area GNP

Kum Jong-su

(2001)

distance between port and cargo site terminal facilities service

the capacity of multi-transport capacity of cargo handling

administrative service rates and charges of inland transport

congestion

Yeo Gi-tae (2002) location throughput facilities service level

Kim Jin-gu (2002) port facilities location cargo amount rates and charges services

29

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005)

voyage degree to attract cargo cargo handling cost amount of

handling cargo connection to inland service reliability location

berth availability quay length feeder network depth

transshipment volumes cargo security profitability

offing degree to attract cargo berth availability cargo handling

cost transshipment volumes

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005)

cargo handling amount port facilities location rates and charges

level of service

Heo Yun-su

(2005)

port facilities rates and charges services marketing geopolitics

location economic and social circumstance

Kim Geun-seop

(2007)

port services facilities cargo handling amount location cost

productivity factor global factor

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) rates and charges services port characteristics

Many experts and scholars make a research on port selection and

competitiveness recently But the factors selection criteria are difference

Nevertheless the main factors are facilities services cost and so on

Therefore port competitiveness factors which chose in this study are port

facilities port services port rates and charges and social circumstance

However the main factors are not the whole factors any more more and more

detail factors and characteristic factors appearance Port selection and

competitiveness factors have changed And the development content is introduced

in next part

30

32 Port Competitiveness Development Tree

As mentioned above port facilities port rates and charges and port location are

the basic factors in the port selection and competitiveness

From the following table we can discover that first one facilities rates and

charges and location are the most important factor in port selection and

competitiveness second one the importance of social circumstance turns larger

inland connection is necessary all the time

Table 321 Main factor in the Pretentious Research

31

port facilities rates and

charges

inland

connection

social

circumstance location

French (1979) radic radic radic

Wiliingale (1982) radic radic

Slack (1985) radic

Pater (1990) radic radic

UNCTAD (1992) radic radic radic

Murphy(1992) radic

Jeon Il-su (1992) radic radic radic

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

(1993)

radic radic radic

Kim Hak-so

(1993) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1996) radic radic radic

Ha Dong-u

amp Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1998) radic radic radic

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

radic

Kum Jong-su

(2001) radic radic radic radic

Kim Jin-gu(2002) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(2002) radic radic

Lirn(2003-2004) radic radic radic

Pater(2004) radic

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005) radic radic radic

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005) radic radic radic

Heo Yun-su

(2005) radic radic radic radic

Kim Geun-seop

(2007) radic radic radic radic

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) radic

32

33 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green

Port Construction

Following the research above Port facilities rates and charges inland

connection and social circumstance are chose in this study port selection and

competitiveness department

e-RTGC Electric rubber tired gantry crane is a mobile gantry crane used for

stacking intermodal containers within the stacking areas of a container terminal

e-RTGC are used at container terminals and container storage yards to straddling

multiple lanes of railroad and container storage or when maximum storage

density in the container stack is desired

AMP is shorted for Alternative Marine Power and Itrsquos a facility which

provides the electric system in the land for ship which entry in the port The

facility can reduce emissions which ship get entrance in the port

AGV is a mobile robot that follows markers or wires in the floor or uses

vision or lasers They are most often used in industrial applications to move

materials around a manufacturing facility or a warehouse Automatic Guided

Vehicle systems work around-the-clock making continuous flow and just-in-time

delivery easier to achieve Application of the automatic guided vehicle has broade

33

ned during the late 20th century and they are no longer restricted to industrial

environments

The e-RTGC AMP and AGV are the new clean facilities and equipments in the

Green Port they donrsquot reduce the efficiency of handling cargo and they also

reduce the CO2 emission account

Green ship certification system if a ship utilizes clean and CO2 emission

reduction technology on the ship building adds equipment and management and

son on certification would be received And the port authority gives some

incentive and preferential treatment among 45 ports Such as a better schedule is

provided for green membership ship priority in handing cargo and discount on

entrance fee

Incentives on the new cleaning technology There are two expressions about

this measure one is that the port authority give a incentive to ship which have a

great utilization on the new cleaning technology and the other one is that

environment provide many incentives to the authority which utilize the new

cleaning technology in the port such as LED street lamp solar power cranes

Green flag The Green Flag incentive program was set up to encourage ships to

slow down in order to improve air quality The Green Flag program provides

approximately $2 million a year in discounts for vessel operators who slow their

ships to 12 knots (22kmh) or less within 20miles (32km) of the harbor

34

According to the Port the Green Flag program reduced air pollution by 600tons in

2007 and is expected to do better in 2008

All of Green ship certification system incentives on the new cleaning

technology and Green Flag are incentives provided for users of port and aimed at

reduce port rates and charges So the 3 measures belong to affect port rates and

charges

Eco-friendly transport means conversion Eco-friendly means of transport are

much accounted of green port for example railway discharge less GHG emission

than truck barge with a clean engine among the river and inshore canal

Joint distribution joint distribution is a collaborative system which port

provides among many logistics companies It can make the cargo handling speed

rapidly and reduce cargo storage time for CO2 emission reducing such as

refrigerated container In an addition it also makes the logistics companies

transport more efficient

Cost on amount of CO2 emission differenced from other port the cost on

amount of CO2 is included in the port cost The cost aims to reduce the CO2

emission directly

CO2 emission reduction policies compared with other traditional port Green

Port gives more cost discount and incentives but in an addition there are many

policies on CO2 emission restriction Such as aging trucks restrictions in inland

transport department ship entry speed reduced and fuel changed in the ship

35

department and so on Whether these restriction policies constrain port

development or not and the degree of these policies constrain port development

will be explain by the AHP results

Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors some ports in the

western countries are opened as a travel place for visitors so as to change the

polluted impress and raise the position in our heart

Cost on amount of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction policies and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors can affect the social

circumstance factor Whether these measures can or not improve the social

circumstance and port competitiveness we have to see the next calculation and

results

36

Chapter 4 The Green Port Competitiveness

Analysis

41 The Green Port Competitiveness Model by AHP

The AHP is one multi-criteria decision making method which has been

extensively applied to a variety of decision-making situations The multi-criteria

techniques are considered to be a promising framework for evaluation of

decision-making factors since they have the potential to take into account

conflicting multidimensional incommensurable and uncertain effects of

decisions explicitly

In order to apply the AHP method a hierarchical decision schema was

constructed by decomposing the decision problem into its decision elements

37

After that the importance or preferences of the decision elements are examined in

a pair-wise comparison to the elements in the hierarchy The parameters are

estimated using pair-wise comparisons between the importance of the attribute or

decision element in the function using data made by each responder Making

comparisons is a question of which of the two attributes is more import as well as

how much more important

Follow these theories the Green Port Competitiveness Model choose factors as

follow in port competitiveness factors part there are port facilities port rates and

charges inland connection social circumstance in Green Port construction part

there are e-RTGC AMP AGV green ship certification system green flag

incentives on the new cleaning technology eco-friendly transport means

conversion joint distribution CO2 emission reduction policies cost on amount of

CO2 emission beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

38

Figure 41 Green Port Competitiveness AHP model

Follow the Green Port Competitiveness AHP as shown we set a questionnaire

survey to many experts scholars working in logistics system area And we got 15

ones and 14 ones results are believable and integrated

42 Green Port Competitiveness Analysis

39

The key to construction of the factors which affects the port competitiveness

is to determine the conceptual model The selection of the factors directly affects

the evaluation of the result In order to ensure the accuracy objectivity and

practicality of evaluation results the following basic principles must be followed

when selecting factors systematic principles the principle of universal

comparability practical principle and goal-oriented principle In view of the

foregoing the competitiveness which affected by Green Port construction model

is made The analysis follows established principles of port competitiveness

evaluation taking into account the characteristics and functions of the port as well

as port facilities port services port rates and charges ship entrance inland

connection social circumstances and so on

(1) Port facilities

e-RTGC U11 AMP U12 AGV U13

(2) Port rates and charges

Green ship certification system U21 Incentives on the new clean

technology U22 Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

(3) Inland connection

Eco-friendly means of transport U31 Joint distribution U32

(4) Social circumstances

40

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41 CO2 emission reduction policies

U42 Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors U43

Table 421 Details of Level I and Level II values

Level I

indicators Symbol Level II indicators Symbol

Port facilities A1

e-RTGC U11

AMP U12

AGV U13

Port rates and

charges A2

Green ship certification system U21

Incentives on the new clean technology U22

Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

Inland

connection A3

Eco-friendly means of transport U31

Joint distribution U32

Social

circumstances A4

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41

CO2 emissions reduction policies U42

Beautiful environment construction in inner

harbors U43

41

I Determination of level I indicator weights

As the ports competitiveness evaluation indicators at this level are complex

and the elements are not easily quantified AHP is adopted to determine the

indicator weights with the basic steps as follows

(1) Establish a comparative judgment matrix The comparative judgment

matrix is obtained through comparing contributed proportion of multiple

indicators to the overall target by the judgment scale wherein the fuzzy

judgment number introduced is 1 3 5 7 and 9 and the reciprocal of

such number indicates the important degree of one element relatively to

another The results are shown in next table

Table 422 Comparison matrix of level I indicators

A1 A2 A3 A4

A1 1 15 13 3

A2 5 1 3 7

A3 3 13 1 5

A4 13 17 15 1

(2) Calculate the characteristic vector of the comparative judgment matrix

which refers to the weighted vector of the indicator The writer adopts

42

the geometric method to calculate the characteristic vector The

calculated result is as follows

ω=(012 0560 026 006)T λmax=418 It can be obtained from the table

RI=09 Wherein ω is the characteristic vector corresponding to the

maximum characteristic value λmax of the comparative judgment matrix

namely the weighted vector of the indicator RI is the average

consistency indicator as shown in following table

Table423 Average random consistency indicator RI

Matrix Order

RI

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

0 0 058 09 112 124 132 141

Matrix Order

RI

9 10 11 12 13 14 15

145 149 152 154 156 158 159

(3) Conduct consistency check on the comparative judgment matrix Adopt

the random consistency proportion CR to judge the consistency of the

comparative judgment matrix According to CI= (λmax -n)(n-1) and

CR=CIRI it can be obtained through calculation CR=007lt01 Thus

this comparative judgment matrix has a satisfactory consistency and the

indicator weight coefficient calculated through this matrix is acceptable

43

II Determination of level II indicator weights

The data at this level are the details of level Ⅰ indicator The judgment

matrix obtained through comparing multiple sub-indicators under Level Ⅰ

indicators is adopted to determine the weights of sub-indicators under each

indicator one by one The specific steps are as follows

(1) The experts score the weights within the given range To determine the

weights of several small indicators under the same big indicator it is

supposed that the score of small indicator ｋ under the indicator j made

by the expert i is Xijk wherein i=12n n is the total number of

experts ј=12m m is the total number of LevelⅡ indicator к

=12Oj Oj is the number of small indicators under the big indicator ј

іјк IJK LRC l I j k

(2) The credit rating of the expert і is l l =1 2 3 l =1 indicates this expert

is quite familiar with the evaluated contents l =2 indicator this expert is

44

with the evaluated contents l =3 indicates this expert is not quite familiar

with the evaluated contents yi1 is the=08 yi2 =05 and yi3=1

(3) The comprehensive evaluation score of small indicator l under the

indicator j is as follows

(4) The formula for normalization processing of indicator weights is as

follows and the absolute weight of the indicator set is marked as

q=(q1q2q11)

(5) Because of the same justification and principle we donrsquot give the detail

about the calculation The same with the level Ⅰ calculation we

manipulation data one by one and get 14 results And obtain the average

45

results by weighted average method The results detail as Table for the

final weights of Level-Ⅱ evaluation indicators

Above the calculation process and method are just one of data from the

questionable surveys In this study the final results are got from the

weighted average by the results of each questionable survey

The final results are shown as Table424

Table424 Indicator weights table of indicator system

Level I

indicators Weight LevelⅡ indicators

Relative

weight

Absolute

weight

Importance

percentage

Port Facilities

A1 02735

e-RTGC U11 05506 01506 1506

AMP U12 01648 00451 451

AGV U13 02826 00773 773

Port Rates and

Charges A2

02902

Green ship certification s

ystem U21 04724 01371 1371

Incentives on the new

clean technology U22 02871 00833 833

Green Flag (speed

reduction incentive)U23 02405 00698 698

Inland

connection A3

02865

Eco-friendly means of

transport U31 05942 01702 1702

Joint distribution U32 04058 01163 1163

Social

environmentA4 00863

Cost on amount of CO2

emission U41 03698 00319 319

CO2 emissions reduction

policies U42 02273 00196 196

Beautiful environment

construction in inner

harbors U43

04029 00348 348

46

III Case study

In the questionable survey we also got the mark of Green Port measures

evaluation value of many main ports such as Singapore Port Shanghai Port

Hongkong Port Busan Port LALB Port Rotterdam Port and Yocohama Port

The highest mark is 5 and lowest one is 1

Table425 Evaluation value of many main ports

Singapore

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

LALB

Port

Rotterdam

Port

Yocohama

Port

Port facilities 38000 36000 34000 38182 38000 42000 32000

Port rates and

charges 32000 36000 31000 35455 32000 39000 33000

Inland

connection 39000 34545 35000 29091 35000 45000 36000

Social

circumstance 42000 32727 41000 32000 38000 42727 36000

With the Green Port and Port competitiveness indicator weights results these

ports got the final evaluation value

47

Table426 Final evaluation value on main ports Green Port measures and

competitiveness

Rotterdam

Port

Singapore

Port

LALB

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

Yocohama

Port

394 345 330 330 319 318 317

43 Results Analysis

From the results table we can obtain the many results as following

① The main Green Port measures which are more important to improve port

competitiveness are Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system the indicator weights are 01702 01506 and

01371 among the 11 indicators

② In the Green Port construction Cost on amount of CO2 emission and CO2

emissions reduction policies are the restrictions indicators but the weight

of two indicators are not big 00319 and 00196 So effect on Green Port

construction to port competitiveness does have the weaken capacity but

not clearly strengthen more clearly Thus Green Port construction really

could improve the port competitiveness

48

③ In the case study traditional ports Rotterdam and Singapore Port give us

better examples on Green Port construction especially Rotterdam Port

④ Hongkong Busan and Yocohama Port all got a lower evaluation value

But in detail Hongkong and Yocohama Port got a lower on the port

facilities and rates and charges Busan Port got a higher on the port

facilities and rates and charges but a lower on the inland connection and

social circumstance

⑤ Shanghai Port doesnrsquot have Particular strength factors but the

comprehensive strength is not bad the same as LALB Port

49

Chapter 5 Conclusion

In this thesis the effects of Green Port construction for improving the port

competitiveness have been studied Under the definition of Green Port the

characteristics of Green Port and its effects has been shown by analysing the AHP

method which based on the questionary survey for Green Port specialists and port

officers

Follow the results of analysis on Green Port competitiveness AHP model

Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green ship certification system is

better for Green Port Construction welcome for shipping companies and citizens

who live around the port And in the analysis of Port competitiveness factors port

rates and charges always affects port competitiveness a lot As a trend inland

connection factor abstracts more attention of shipping companies

50

On the trend of port department each port should take a activity to adjust

strategy for improving its competitiveness Such as in the main ports evaluation

Busan port get a high value on port rates and charges and port facilities but as a

lower value on inland connection factor the final value is not as well as we look

forward In the evaluation of Singapore Port through it gets a lower value on rates

and charges higher value on inland connection and social circumstance causes the

final value are better So the Green Port Construction may be a trend in port

department

In the results of this thesis Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system are better solutions for Green Port Construction And

especially it can be verified that the port rates and charges always affects port

competitiveness Futhermore the investment for Green Port construction and its

effects have to be verified in the future

51

References

1 Hoyle B S and Smith J 1992 Transport and Development In Modern

transport geography edited by B S Hoyle R D Knowles (London Belhaven

Press)pp11-31

2 Beresford A K C De Souza A J R G and Pettit S J 2005 Stategic

development of liner shipping companies and terminal operators Ocean yearbook

19(Chicago 1L The University of Chicago Press) pp 732-750

3 Heaver T D 2002 Supply chain and logistics management implications for

liner shipping In The handbook of maritime economics and business edited by C

Grammenos (LondonLLP) pp 375-396

4 Park T E (2011) A Study on selection criteria of Green Port and evaluation of

major Korean port A masters thesis of graduate school of Incheon university

52

5 JeongBH (2009)Green port management policy directions in the green

growth era- The case of Gwangyang port in Republic of Korea Journal of Korea

Port Economic Association Vol25(3) p361-384

6 Lee J S Han N H(2009) A study on Green Port Revitalization According to

Air Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

7 Lee Y K Nan J W(2010)Green Logistics Policy Analysis and Implications

of Japan

8 Lee B S (2010)Tendency and Countermeasures on Green Logistics in Port

Logistics Company A masters thesis of graduate school of Korean Maritime

university

9 Lee J S (2009) A Study on Green Port Revitalization According to Air

Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

10 Zhang F Y Li Z Lu X J Yao X L(2008)Competitiveness of Inland

Ports Based on F-AHP

11 Port of Long Beach (2009) Green Port Policy wwwpolbcom

12 The port of Los Angeles wwwportoflosangelesorg

4

And research process in this study is shown in ltFigure 1gt

ltFigure 1gt Research process

In chapter 1 research background and objective research method and process

are included And chapter 2 introduces the Green Port construction background

definition the Green Port construction situation in many countries and each

department introduction in Green Port construction The chapter 3 views the

literature on port competitiveness and obtains the influence factors used in this

study trend and relationship between port competitiveness The chapter 4 based

5

on the survey data and calculates each indicator importance degree by AHP

method and analysis the result Finally in chapter 5 the conclusion summary the

whole study by the result analysis

6

Chapter 2 Green Port Construction Situation

21 Green Port Construction Background

As the United Nations Secretary General has said the greatest challenge which

we are facing is environmental regulators It is a growing crisis with economic

health and safety food production security and other dimensions

The Kyoto Protocol is an international agreement linked to the United Nations

Framework Convention on Climate Change The major feature of the Kyoto

Protocol is that it sets binding targets for 37 industrialized countries and the

European community for reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to fight

global warming These amount to an average of five percent bellow 1990 level

over the five-year period 2008-2012

The protocol was initially adopted on 11 December 1997 in Japan but all of the

member countries entered into force on16 February 2005 The Kyoto Protocol

7

was adopted in Kyoto Japan on 11 December 1997 and entered into force on 16

February 2005 The detailed rules for the implementation of the Protocol were

adopted at COP 7 in Marrakesh in 2001 and are called the ldquoMarrakesh Accordsrdquo

Follow the ltKyoto Protocolgt several flexible mechanisms are allowed Such

as emissions trading the clean development mechanism (CDM) and joint

implementation The mechanisms allow AnnexⅠcounties to meet their GHG

emission limitations by purchasing GHG emission reductions credits from

elsewhere through financial exchanges projects that reduce emissions in

non-Annex Ⅰ countries or Annex Ⅰ countries with excess allowances The

mechanisms help stimulate green investment and help Parties meet their emission

targets in a cost-effective way

Therefore many countries take action on reducing the GHG discharge emission

For example increase the energy utilization efficiency develop the solar power

wind energy tidal energy and other clean energy in their industry The details

about objective of GHG emission reduction in main countries are displayed as the

following ltTable 1gt

8

ltTable 1gt Objective of CO2 reduce in main countries

Bench

mark of

Year

Objective

()

Absolute

quantity

()

Remark

EU 1990 20~30 -20~-30 Norway New Zealand 40 reducing

USA 2005 17 -3 Passed by House of Representatives

Japan 1990 25 -25 On the premise of attention with China

India

Korea 2020

(BAU) 30 mdashmdash

Discharge amount is up to 564million don

in estimation

China 2005 40~50 60~150

(2005) Each GDP

India 2005 20-25 mdashmdash With the developed countries

participation

Russia 1990 25 -25 Be neutral country

Norway 1990 30~40 -30~-40 mdashmdash

New

Zealand 1990 10~20 -10~ -20 mdashmdash

Austria 2000 5~25 -3~-11 mdashmdash

Canada 2003 20 -3 mdashmdash

Mexico 2002 50 mdashmdash With the developed countries

participation

South

Africa

2020

(BAU) 34 mdashmdash

With the developed countries

participation

Brazil 2020

(BAU) 36~39

-20

(2005) mdashmdash

(Korean Maritime Institute 20095)

9

22 The Definition of Green Port

As the global warming affecting in the world climate has been heavily changed

natural disaster frequently occurred natural resources depletion and supply

imbalance cause crisis to reach a high level For the purpose of getting away from

financial crisis and creating the new growth motivity the counties in the world

make more efforts on developing economic

Because of the realization of this global climate and environment crisis Korean

government had brought out the ldquoGreen Growth Policyrdquo And it made the ldquoGreen

Growth Policyrdquo be embodied and law-governed announced ldquoLow Carbon Green

Growth of the Basic Lawrdquo

In order to coordinate with this policy and law build up the ldquoGreen Growthrdquo

everyone make their efforts and reach ldquoGreen Growthrdquo in Korea each department

As a important industry department port authority also take activity to match the

national strategy of ldquoGreen Growthrdquo and draw up the plan on ldquoGreen Portrdquo

construction

However there isnrsquot a clear definition about the Green Port Korean Land

Transport and Maritime Ministry have explained the Green Port as follows Green

house gas Reducing Energy Effciencing Nature-friendly Port The explanation is

very easy to understand but from a professional point of view it not very

10

comprehensive and concrete So we have to understand the concept in the Green

Port Construction measures and programs There are about 4 kind explanation and

promotion programs in the Green Port Respectively the port which based on

green technology and green business creating new growth motive improving

living standards jumping in the ranks of the advanced port

ltFigure 2gt Green Port appearance and basic definition

In the Green Growth National Strategy Policy there are 10 pieces of policy

directions and 50 researches each department should choose the appropriate one

Follow these researches chose by port availability especially Low Carbon

11

Self-sufficiency Port The Disaster Safety Port Eco-friendly Port Resource

Recycling Port and in this study Green Port construction is a plan on

comprehensive and mix of 4kinds of Green Port Construction

Table 221 Four Promotions for Green Port Construction

Promotion Program

(Green Port type) Activities

Low-Carbon

Self-Sufficiency Port

Eco-friendly inland transportation system building

New renewable resources power equipment utilization

AMP LED utilization

The Disaster Safety

Port

Disaster Prevention environment infrastructure building

Disaster prediction and corresponding system utilization

Eco-Friendly Port Beauty the port by green park planting and so on

Provide eco-friendly port building programs

Resource Recycling

Port

Port waste (silt soil) effectively recycling system

Establish resource recycling port paragon

As table1 shown each type of Green Port has a separate emphasis

Eco-friendly inland transportation system which encourages utilizing rail canal

barge clean system reduces the truck application amount AMP means

Alternative Maritime Power supply system replaces with ship power generation

The Green Port construction in most of counties is the low-carbon self-sufficiency

12

port And in their construction maybe add a few other type promote director like

beauty the port by green park planting and so on

However in this study the Green Port concept is a comprehensive plan among

4 types not a specialization system

23 Green Port Construction Situation in major countries

After ltKyoto protocolgt having brought out each department began to take

affords on the reducing the GHG (greenhouse gas) emission In port department

the activities are embodied in the Green Port construction In this study many

major ports in US EU Japan and Korea are chose to explain for research

231 US

① LALB Port

In order to achieve to reduce marine pollutants standby and build clean port

LALB Port standby resource ministry and environment protection ministry

signed a 5year plan on clean standby action cooperation

This promotion business plan set a set of marine pollutants standby emission

limitation on the ship department from the statistics year 2006-2007 to 2010-2011

handling department heavy duty equipment truck department and so on Such as

13

in Green Port Technology construction department measures and programs are

shown in following Table

Table231 the details of LALB Port Green Port Promotion Programs

Promotion Program

Heavy Equipment Truck

Heavy Equipment

Replace and Update Aging Facilities

Substitute Fuels and Clean Fuel Incentives

Budgetary for the Development of Substitute Fuels

Marine Vessels Tugs

Ship Speed Reduction within the Port

Electrical supply of parking in the Berth

Use low-sulfur fuel (supplementary motor)

Handling Equipment

Air Quality Monitoring

Measure ambient air pollution levels in the vicinity of

the Port

Include a number of real-time air quality measurements

On the restrict situation of heavy equipment trucks and others vessels must to

be replaced and rebuilt in order to minimum the emission of NOx And the trucks

which donrsquot reach the regulate standard do not allowed to get in the port These

regulations will help their owner to replace and update trucks and also set up a

replacement plan to 16000 aging trucks make the replace done by 2012 As

foundation repaired the cargo owner must to pay an addition tax about 20ft 35$

40ft 79$

14

In the maritime department the speed reduction incentive took action in

Jan2005 When ship entry into the port boundary speed must be reduced under

20 miles 12kont At the beginning the effect of this plan is very clearly so the

limitation may be raised to 40mile And AMP (Alternative Maritime Power ) is

encouraged to be built and developed as to ship use their engine and get GHG

emission

② New York- New Jersey Port

The New York- New Jersey Port Authority brought out environment policy on

CO2 emission reduction The main concepts as following first reduce PX SOX

3 each year and CO2 5 Second ship must utilize sulfur-low fuel as a

obligation Third AMP is provided Forth modern the unloading and loading

equipment must be built Fifth promote trucks replacement Sixth reform the ship

engine Seventh invent 9 billion dollars in the following 10 years Eighth invent

to all hybrid equipment (325) Ninth install the hybrid truck in AMPT and

NYCT

③ Seattle Port

15

In Seattle Port Air Environment Maritime Improvement plan has been

accepted in 2005 The plan includes first set up Puget Sound Maritime Air

Forum and make one AMP provide services for two tour ships second change

the diesel hybrid equipment into electric utilization Third use bio-diesel and

diesel catalyst and reduce the emission Forth emphasize the standard and plan of

truck minimum the idling time

Seattle Port Tacoma Port and Vancouver made a assignment and promote

ldquoNorthwest Ports Clean Air Strategyrdquo

④ Auckland Port

Auckland Port set up the aging replacement plan in 2008 and invent 20 milion

dollars gas emission should reach the level And cargo transport system in port

hinterland port authority and Air environment management committee make

cooperation and give an incentive to truck which use new clean technology

Table232 Short term and Long term Green Port Plans in Auckland Port

16

17

232 EU

Rotterdam Port

As the biggest Port in EU Rotterdam Port takes more affords in reducing the

CO2 emission Main programs are low carbon footprint AMP and so on The

limitation of CO2 emission reduces down 50 of 1990 by 2025

In July 2008 the authority of Rotterdam port gave international cooperation

with other ports an extra boost by organizing the World Ports Climate Conference

During this conference the authority of Rotterdam discussed possible ways in

which ports and business could reduce air pollution and CO2 emissions The

proposals the authority of Rotterdam was set out in a declaration which was

supported by all 55 port cities attending the conference The conference resulted

in five projects to improve air quality and reduce CO2 emissions The authority of

Rotterdam is behind the project to further elaborate an Environmental Ship Index

The Rotterdam Climate Initiative is a joint venture with the municipality of

Rotterdam DCMR Environmental Protection Agency Rijnmond and Deltalinqs

Common goal is to halve CO2 emissions in the region by 2025 in comparison with

1990 levels In connection with the Rotterdam Climate Initiative the port works

on (together with DCMR and others) creating an infrastructure for the capture

18

transport and storage of CO2 A business case presented in the summer of 2008 is

now being elaborated into a business plan The business case concludes that

Rotterdam can begin in 2015 with the capture transport and underground storage

of five million tons of CO2 per annum This means that the basic infrastructure

will then be in place for further growth in capture and storage to twenty million

tons in 2025

In 2008 a start was made on the development of a sustainability index for

activities relating to the P for Planet (environment) In 2009 it will further expand

the index to cover the P for People and the P for Profit In the first phase of the

sustainability index CO2 footprint sustainable purchasing sustainable building

and sustainable land allocation will be covered

233 Japan

① Tacoma Port

In the Tacoma Port there are some programs on protecting the air water and

soil environment

In the air protection department ldquoNorthwest Ports Clean Air Strategyrdquo

ldquoGreen Gateway for Traderdquo and ldquoTruck Programrdquo had brought out to against air

pollution The concepts include using ultra-low sulfur diesel bio-diesel and other

cleaner-burning fuels in cargo-handling equipment using low-sulfur distillate

19

fuels at berth adding ldquogreen designrdquo environmental features to ships including

diesel-electric motors that save up to 30 percent in fuel and significantly reduce

emissions setting targets to change older less-efficient truck engines installing

anti-idling devices on rail-switching engines as well as partnering on other

innovative technological advance

The Port of Tacomarsquos four dockside rail yards move cargo quickly and

efficiently from container terminals They also reduce the number of trucks on

city streets and highways Each full train that leaves the Port represents 250 to 300

trucks not on our roads reducing roadway congestion and diesel emissions The

lowest emission route to ship cargo from Asia to the US Midwest is through the

Puget Sound according to the results of a study by Herbert Engineering released

in May 2009

And in the land protection program there are successful clean projects open

spaces and future habitat restoration In 2007 the Port purchased about 70 acres

of open space known as Juliarsquos Gulch and Storey Pit located between the

Tideflats and residential Northeast Tacoma Monitor water quality system is in

utilization in the water department in Tacoma Port

② Tokyo Port

In the Tokyo Port Green Port programs are almost similar with Tacoma Port

e-RTGC (Rubber Tired Gantry Crane) the barge between Tokyo and Yocohama

20

which shorten international maritime container cargo transportation land distance

super eco-shipbuilding technology dissemination and promotion green business

certification operation and shippers and logistics companies support cooperation

③ Osaka Port and Hakata Port

AMP electrical power equipment and solar power equipment are in utilization in

Osaka Port E-RTGC and solar power of refrigerated container are in utilization in

the Hakata Port

234 Korea

In Busan Port a set of Green Port took implementation such as LNG truck

E-RTGC equipment utilization eco-friendly transport means conversion (rail

canal barge) and GHG emission reduction obligation Table233

21

ltTable 233gt Summary of the Main Port of Green Port Measures

COUNTRY PORT MEASURES

US

LALB Port

Green flag AMP discharge gas reduction obligation

recommends use of alternative fuels and clean fuel

funding for the development of alternative fuels facilities

by new engine development instead of NOx emissions

green truck program (reduce70-80) low-sulfur fuel

utilization restore and revitalize the Los Cerritos

Wetlands

New York

Port

AMP modernized facilities utilization high speed hybrid

yard

Auckland

Port

Incentives on the new cleaning technology containers

transportation system

Seattle Port

AMP green ship membership Tier 4 level reducing PM

by 1994 level Smart Way program Northwest Ports

Clean Air Strategy

EU Rotterdam

Port

Clean engine (barge) green ship membership carbon

footprint calculation cruise ship which under port

authority change to use low-sulfur fuel low emission

engine development and utilization Green Award AMP

ship recycling incentives

Japan

Tokyo Port

RTGC (Rubber Tired Gantry Crane) apply for the barge

between Tokyo and Yocohama shorten international

maritime container cargo transportation land distance

super eco-shipbuilding technology dissemination and

promotion green business certification operation

shippers and logistics companies support cooperation

Osaka Port AMP electrical power equipment solar power equipment

Hakata Port E-RTGC solar power utilization in refrigerated container

Korea Busan Port

LNG truck E-RTGC eco-friendly transport means

conversion (rail canal barge) GHG emission reduction

obligation

22

24 Green Port Indicators Research

As the previous section list shown Green Port measures and programs are

substantially the same

When a ship entry in the port boundary from voyage many ports give a

incentive on shifting and utilizing sulfur-low fuel and reducing the speed under

20 miles when the ship berth in the port the alternative maritime power are

provided which replace its power generation

Next in the cargo unloading and loading department the same with above

utilization of sulfur-low fuel and electrical equipment are promoted and

eco-driving education to driver is necessary what speed is fuel fully burning and

emission minimum point

In the cargo transport department in other words truck department the

replacement on aging trucks is popular in many ports aging trucks are prohibited

close to port at the same time an incentive or support function are provided on

aging replacement The automated equipments are recommended to utilize in the

Green Port like hybrid yard tractor And a perfect plan on truck running also could

reduce the idling time and against the emission of CO2

The details reference the following Table 241

23

Table241 Green Port measures in port each department

Emission reduction programs

Ship

department

Shipping

in the

port

boundary

Obligation on the utilization of sulfur-low fuel

Reform ship engine and utilize hybrid

Speed reduce in the port entrance(a off-shore fee

incentive)

Off-shore AMP

Shift utilization system of clean fuel

Unloading and loading

department

Obligation on the utilization of sulfur-low fuel

Replace electrical equipment

Eco-driving

Truck department Hybrid yard tractor utilization

Promote aging truck replacement

Minimum the idling time

Others LED light in the Port

Develop renew and recycle resource energy

The Green Port measures in this study are e-RTGC AMP AGV Green Ship

certification system incentives on the new clean technology Green Flag(speed

reduction incentive)eco-friendly transport means conversion joint distribution

the cost on account of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction polities and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

The details and definition on each Green Port measure and the relationship with

Port Competitiveness will be expressed in next chapter

24

Chapter 3 The Relationship between Port

Competitiveness and Green Port Construction

31 Port Competitiveness Literature Review

Although past studies on port selection models have focused on port selection

made by port facilities port services port rates and charge and location

Murphy made a survey between 534 shipping companies and port authorities in

1989 and between 1850 shipping companies and port authorities in 1992

Comparing with other papers Murphys got a survey among more widely

objects In his paper port selection(port competitiveness) was seen to affected by

facilities situation appropriate pilotage max ship entrance probability the

25

capability of handling non-regular cargos whether to provide information of ship

nationality or not and port services level

In French model (1979) there are two factors affecting the port selection (port

competitiveness) endogenous factor and exogenous factor In endogenous factors

there are adequacy and physical plant condition of terminal facilities terminal rate

and charges frequency and geographic coverage of ship and freight services the

capacity of connecting to inland rails or transport net and the services provides for

the shipping or logistics And exogenous factors included the size and economic

capacity of hinterland as a source exports or market for imports national

economic situation trade policy and support established by government the

situation at home and abroad

The same as Frenchs paper in Paters paper in 1990 there are endogenous and

exogenous factors too In endogenous there are the services provides for the

shipping or logistics capacity of terminal facilities situation and condition of

facilities operation strategies established by port authority convenience to utilize

And the political situation at home and abroad social change economic factor

stabilized labor and capital However in 2004 there is a tremendous change in

Peters new paper There are four parts multi-modal process interface transport

modes infrastructure Multi-model Process part includes ship entrance rapid

speed and accuracy shipper and shipping companies reactive operation flexibility

Interface includes labor power information technology and so on And there are

26

ship calls frequency and amount of fleet factors in the transport modes part In the

infrastructure part includes port facility equipments and so on

Port facilities rates and charges services inland situation and social

circumstance factors affect the port selection and competitiveness a lot from the

research until 1992 by Murphy And in Lirn and Pater research 2003-2004 the

new and detail factors are shown to us

We can clearly see the contents in next table

27

Table 311 Prevention literature research results

Influence factors

French

(1979)

Endogenous

port facilities port rate and charges calls frequency port services

port connection with inland

Exogenous

economic size of hinterland national economic situation trade

policy home and abroad situation

Willingale

(1982)

voyage distance economy size entrance to port and route port

facilities max ship entrance probability port operation rates and

charges port authority scale of port

Slack

(1985)

cost of inland transportation port proximity ship demurrage

multi-transport

Peter

(1990)

Endogenous

port facilities condition of facilities operation strategies

convenience to utilize

Exogenous

political situation social change economic factor stabilized labor

and capital

UNCTAD

(1992)

port facilities services location level of financial industry

information communication system social circumstances economic

stability

Murphy

(1992)

facilities situation appropriate pilotage max ship entrance

probability the capability of handling non-regular cargos whether to

provide information of ship nationality or not port services level

Lirn

(2003-2004)

physical and technologic facilities geopolitical location port

operation and management shipping and terminal cost

Peter

(2004)

Multi-modal Process

ship entrance rapid speed and accuracy shipper and shipping

companies reactive operation flexibility

Interface labor and capital

Transport modes ship calls frequency and amount of fleet factors

28

And there are many experts and scholars research for the influence factors to

port selection and competitiveness in Korea The specific content follows table5

Table 312 Literature research in Korean academia

Influence factors

Jeon Il-su (1992) location facilities charges service level (EDI) terminal operation

port authority

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

( 1993 )

location facilities throughput charges service operation

situation

Kim Hak-so

(1993)

export shipping amount of annual cost of each ton of cargo

marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km of

cargo loading time

import marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km

of cargo amount of liner ship

Yeo Gi-tae (1996) location facilities throughput charge service operation situation

Ha Dong-u amp

Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

location facilities service level logistics charges environment of

logistics service

Yeo Gi-tae (1999) location facilities throughput charges service

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

throughput quay length yard area GNP

Kum Jong-su

(2001)

distance between port and cargo site terminal facilities service

the capacity of multi-transport capacity of cargo handling

administrative service rates and charges of inland transport

congestion

Yeo Gi-tae (2002) location throughput facilities service level

Kim Jin-gu (2002) port facilities location cargo amount rates and charges services

29

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005)

voyage degree to attract cargo cargo handling cost amount of

handling cargo connection to inland service reliability location

berth availability quay length feeder network depth

transshipment volumes cargo security profitability

offing degree to attract cargo berth availability cargo handling

cost transshipment volumes

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005)

cargo handling amount port facilities location rates and charges

level of service

Heo Yun-su

(2005)

port facilities rates and charges services marketing geopolitics

location economic and social circumstance

Kim Geun-seop

(2007)

port services facilities cargo handling amount location cost

productivity factor global factor

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) rates and charges services port characteristics

Many experts and scholars make a research on port selection and

competitiveness recently But the factors selection criteria are difference

Nevertheless the main factors are facilities services cost and so on

Therefore port competitiveness factors which chose in this study are port

facilities port services port rates and charges and social circumstance

However the main factors are not the whole factors any more more and more

detail factors and characteristic factors appearance Port selection and

competitiveness factors have changed And the development content is introduced

in next part

30

32 Port Competitiveness Development Tree

As mentioned above port facilities port rates and charges and port location are

the basic factors in the port selection and competitiveness

From the following table we can discover that first one facilities rates and

charges and location are the most important factor in port selection and

competitiveness second one the importance of social circumstance turns larger

inland connection is necessary all the time

Table 321 Main factor in the Pretentious Research

31

port facilities rates and

charges

inland

connection

social

circumstance location

French (1979) radic radic radic

Wiliingale (1982) radic radic

Slack (1985) radic

Pater (1990) radic radic

UNCTAD (1992) radic radic radic

Murphy(1992) radic

Jeon Il-su (1992) radic radic radic

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

(1993)

radic radic radic

Kim Hak-so

(1993) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1996) radic radic radic

Ha Dong-u

amp Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1998) radic radic radic

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

radic

Kum Jong-su

(2001) radic radic radic radic

Kim Jin-gu(2002) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(2002) radic radic

Lirn(2003-2004) radic radic radic

Pater(2004) radic

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005) radic radic radic

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005) radic radic radic

Heo Yun-su

(2005) radic radic radic radic

Kim Geun-seop

(2007) radic radic radic radic

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) radic

32

33 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green

Port Construction

Following the research above Port facilities rates and charges inland

connection and social circumstance are chose in this study port selection and

competitiveness department

e-RTGC Electric rubber tired gantry crane is a mobile gantry crane used for

stacking intermodal containers within the stacking areas of a container terminal

e-RTGC are used at container terminals and container storage yards to straddling

multiple lanes of railroad and container storage or when maximum storage

density in the container stack is desired

AMP is shorted for Alternative Marine Power and Itrsquos a facility which

provides the electric system in the land for ship which entry in the port The

facility can reduce emissions which ship get entrance in the port

AGV is a mobile robot that follows markers or wires in the floor or uses

vision or lasers They are most often used in industrial applications to move

materials around a manufacturing facility or a warehouse Automatic Guided

Vehicle systems work around-the-clock making continuous flow and just-in-time

delivery easier to achieve Application of the automatic guided vehicle has broade

33

ned during the late 20th century and they are no longer restricted to industrial

environments

The e-RTGC AMP and AGV are the new clean facilities and equipments in the

Green Port they donrsquot reduce the efficiency of handling cargo and they also

reduce the CO2 emission account

Green ship certification system if a ship utilizes clean and CO2 emission

reduction technology on the ship building adds equipment and management and

son on certification would be received And the port authority gives some

incentive and preferential treatment among 45 ports Such as a better schedule is

provided for green membership ship priority in handing cargo and discount on

entrance fee

Incentives on the new cleaning technology There are two expressions about

this measure one is that the port authority give a incentive to ship which have a

great utilization on the new cleaning technology and the other one is that

environment provide many incentives to the authority which utilize the new

cleaning technology in the port such as LED street lamp solar power cranes

Green flag The Green Flag incentive program was set up to encourage ships to

slow down in order to improve air quality The Green Flag program provides

approximately $2 million a year in discounts for vessel operators who slow their

ships to 12 knots (22kmh) or less within 20miles (32km) of the harbor

34

According to the Port the Green Flag program reduced air pollution by 600tons in

2007 and is expected to do better in 2008

All of Green ship certification system incentives on the new cleaning

technology and Green Flag are incentives provided for users of port and aimed at

reduce port rates and charges So the 3 measures belong to affect port rates and

charges

Eco-friendly transport means conversion Eco-friendly means of transport are

much accounted of green port for example railway discharge less GHG emission

than truck barge with a clean engine among the river and inshore canal

Joint distribution joint distribution is a collaborative system which port

provides among many logistics companies It can make the cargo handling speed

rapidly and reduce cargo storage time for CO2 emission reducing such as

refrigerated container In an addition it also makes the logistics companies

transport more efficient

Cost on amount of CO2 emission differenced from other port the cost on

amount of CO2 is included in the port cost The cost aims to reduce the CO2

emission directly

CO2 emission reduction policies compared with other traditional port Green

Port gives more cost discount and incentives but in an addition there are many

policies on CO2 emission restriction Such as aging trucks restrictions in inland

transport department ship entry speed reduced and fuel changed in the ship

35

department and so on Whether these restriction policies constrain port

development or not and the degree of these policies constrain port development

will be explain by the AHP results

Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors some ports in the

western countries are opened as a travel place for visitors so as to change the

polluted impress and raise the position in our heart

Cost on amount of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction policies and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors can affect the social

circumstance factor Whether these measures can or not improve the social

circumstance and port competitiveness we have to see the next calculation and

results

36

Chapter 4 The Green Port Competitiveness

Analysis

41 The Green Port Competitiveness Model by AHP

The AHP is one multi-criteria decision making method which has been

extensively applied to a variety of decision-making situations The multi-criteria

techniques are considered to be a promising framework for evaluation of

decision-making factors since they have the potential to take into account

conflicting multidimensional incommensurable and uncertain effects of

decisions explicitly

In order to apply the AHP method a hierarchical decision schema was

constructed by decomposing the decision problem into its decision elements

37

After that the importance or preferences of the decision elements are examined in

a pair-wise comparison to the elements in the hierarchy The parameters are

estimated using pair-wise comparisons between the importance of the attribute or

decision element in the function using data made by each responder Making

comparisons is a question of which of the two attributes is more import as well as

how much more important

Follow these theories the Green Port Competitiveness Model choose factors as

follow in port competitiveness factors part there are port facilities port rates and

charges inland connection social circumstance in Green Port construction part

there are e-RTGC AMP AGV green ship certification system green flag

incentives on the new cleaning technology eco-friendly transport means

conversion joint distribution CO2 emission reduction policies cost on amount of

CO2 emission beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

38

Figure 41 Green Port Competitiveness AHP model

Follow the Green Port Competitiveness AHP as shown we set a questionnaire

survey to many experts scholars working in logistics system area And we got 15

ones and 14 ones results are believable and integrated

42 Green Port Competitiveness Analysis

39

The key to construction of the factors which affects the port competitiveness

is to determine the conceptual model The selection of the factors directly affects

the evaluation of the result In order to ensure the accuracy objectivity and

practicality of evaluation results the following basic principles must be followed

when selecting factors systematic principles the principle of universal

comparability practical principle and goal-oriented principle In view of the

foregoing the competitiveness which affected by Green Port construction model

is made The analysis follows established principles of port competitiveness

evaluation taking into account the characteristics and functions of the port as well

as port facilities port services port rates and charges ship entrance inland

connection social circumstances and so on

(1) Port facilities

e-RTGC U11 AMP U12 AGV U13

(2) Port rates and charges

Green ship certification system U21 Incentives on the new clean

technology U22 Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

(3) Inland connection

Eco-friendly means of transport U31 Joint distribution U32

(4) Social circumstances

40

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41 CO2 emission reduction policies

U42 Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors U43

Table 421 Details of Level I and Level II values

Level I

indicators Symbol Level II indicators Symbol

Port facilities A1

e-RTGC U11

AMP U12

AGV U13

Port rates and

charges A2

Green ship certification system U21

Incentives on the new clean technology U22

Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

Inland

connection A3

Eco-friendly means of transport U31

Joint distribution U32

Social

circumstances A4

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41

CO2 emissions reduction policies U42

Beautiful environment construction in inner

harbors U43

41

I Determination of level I indicator weights

As the ports competitiveness evaluation indicators at this level are complex

and the elements are not easily quantified AHP is adopted to determine the

indicator weights with the basic steps as follows

(1) Establish a comparative judgment matrix The comparative judgment

matrix is obtained through comparing contributed proportion of multiple

indicators to the overall target by the judgment scale wherein the fuzzy

judgment number introduced is 1 3 5 7 and 9 and the reciprocal of

such number indicates the important degree of one element relatively to

another The results are shown in next table

Table 422 Comparison matrix of level I indicators

A1 A2 A3 A4

A1 1 15 13 3

A2 5 1 3 7

A3 3 13 1 5

A4 13 17 15 1

(2) Calculate the characteristic vector of the comparative judgment matrix

which refers to the weighted vector of the indicator The writer adopts

42

the geometric method to calculate the characteristic vector The

calculated result is as follows

ω=(012 0560 026 006)T λmax=418 It can be obtained from the table

RI=09 Wherein ω is the characteristic vector corresponding to the

maximum characteristic value λmax of the comparative judgment matrix

namely the weighted vector of the indicator RI is the average

consistency indicator as shown in following table

Table423 Average random consistency indicator RI

Matrix Order

RI

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

0 0 058 09 112 124 132 141

Matrix Order

RI

9 10 11 12 13 14 15

145 149 152 154 156 158 159

(3) Conduct consistency check on the comparative judgment matrix Adopt

the random consistency proportion CR to judge the consistency of the

comparative judgment matrix According to CI= (λmax -n)(n-1) and

CR=CIRI it can be obtained through calculation CR=007lt01 Thus

this comparative judgment matrix has a satisfactory consistency and the

indicator weight coefficient calculated through this matrix is acceptable

43

II Determination of level II indicator weights

The data at this level are the details of level Ⅰ indicator The judgment

matrix obtained through comparing multiple sub-indicators under Level Ⅰ

indicators is adopted to determine the weights of sub-indicators under each

indicator one by one The specific steps are as follows

(1) The experts score the weights within the given range To determine the

weights of several small indicators under the same big indicator it is

supposed that the score of small indicator ｋ under the indicator j made

by the expert i is Xijk wherein i=12n n is the total number of

experts ј=12m m is the total number of LevelⅡ indicator к

=12Oj Oj is the number of small indicators under the big indicator ј

іјк IJK LRC l I j k

(2) The credit rating of the expert і is l l =1 2 3 l =1 indicates this expert

is quite familiar with the evaluated contents l =2 indicator this expert is

44

with the evaluated contents l =3 indicates this expert is not quite familiar

with the evaluated contents yi1 is the=08 yi2 =05 and yi3=1

(3) The comprehensive evaluation score of small indicator l under the

indicator j is as follows

(4) The formula for normalization processing of indicator weights is as

follows and the absolute weight of the indicator set is marked as

q=(q1q2q11)

(5) Because of the same justification and principle we donrsquot give the detail

about the calculation The same with the level Ⅰ calculation we

manipulation data one by one and get 14 results And obtain the average

45

results by weighted average method The results detail as Table for the

final weights of Level-Ⅱ evaluation indicators

Above the calculation process and method are just one of data from the

questionable surveys In this study the final results are got from the

weighted average by the results of each questionable survey

The final results are shown as Table424

Table424 Indicator weights table of indicator system

Level I

indicators Weight LevelⅡ indicators

Relative

weight

Absolute

weight

Importance

percentage

Port Facilities

A1 02735

e-RTGC U11 05506 01506 1506

AMP U12 01648 00451 451

AGV U13 02826 00773 773

Port Rates and

Charges A2

02902

Green ship certification s

ystem U21 04724 01371 1371

Incentives on the new

clean technology U22 02871 00833 833

Green Flag (speed

reduction incentive)U23 02405 00698 698

Inland

connection A3

02865

Eco-friendly means of

transport U31 05942 01702 1702

Joint distribution U32 04058 01163 1163

Social

environmentA4 00863

Cost on amount of CO2

emission U41 03698 00319 319

CO2 emissions reduction

policies U42 02273 00196 196

Beautiful environment

construction in inner

harbors U43

04029 00348 348

46

III Case study

In the questionable survey we also got the mark of Green Port measures

evaluation value of many main ports such as Singapore Port Shanghai Port

Hongkong Port Busan Port LALB Port Rotterdam Port and Yocohama Port

The highest mark is 5 and lowest one is 1

Table425 Evaluation value of many main ports

Singapore

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

LALB

Port

Rotterdam

Port

Yocohama

Port

Port facilities 38000 36000 34000 38182 38000 42000 32000

Port rates and

charges 32000 36000 31000 35455 32000 39000 33000

Inland

connection 39000 34545 35000 29091 35000 45000 36000

Social

circumstance 42000 32727 41000 32000 38000 42727 36000

With the Green Port and Port competitiveness indicator weights results these

ports got the final evaluation value

47

Table426 Final evaluation value on main ports Green Port measures and

competitiveness

Rotterdam

Port

Singapore

Port

LALB

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

Yocohama

Port

394 345 330 330 319 318 317

43 Results Analysis

From the results table we can obtain the many results as following

① The main Green Port measures which are more important to improve port

competitiveness are Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system the indicator weights are 01702 01506 and

01371 among the 11 indicators

② In the Green Port construction Cost on amount of CO2 emission and CO2

emissions reduction policies are the restrictions indicators but the weight

of two indicators are not big 00319 and 00196 So effect on Green Port

construction to port competitiveness does have the weaken capacity but

not clearly strengthen more clearly Thus Green Port construction really

could improve the port competitiveness

48

③ In the case study traditional ports Rotterdam and Singapore Port give us

better examples on Green Port construction especially Rotterdam Port

④ Hongkong Busan and Yocohama Port all got a lower evaluation value

But in detail Hongkong and Yocohama Port got a lower on the port

facilities and rates and charges Busan Port got a higher on the port

facilities and rates and charges but a lower on the inland connection and

social circumstance

⑤ Shanghai Port doesnrsquot have Particular strength factors but the

comprehensive strength is not bad the same as LALB Port

49

Chapter 5 Conclusion

In this thesis the effects of Green Port construction for improving the port

competitiveness have been studied Under the definition of Green Port the

characteristics of Green Port and its effects has been shown by analysing the AHP

method which based on the questionary survey for Green Port specialists and port

officers

Follow the results of analysis on Green Port competitiveness AHP model

Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green ship certification system is

better for Green Port Construction welcome for shipping companies and citizens

who live around the port And in the analysis of Port competitiveness factors port

rates and charges always affects port competitiveness a lot As a trend inland

connection factor abstracts more attention of shipping companies

50

On the trend of port department each port should take a activity to adjust

strategy for improving its competitiveness Such as in the main ports evaluation

Busan port get a high value on port rates and charges and port facilities but as a

lower value on inland connection factor the final value is not as well as we look

forward In the evaluation of Singapore Port through it gets a lower value on rates

and charges higher value on inland connection and social circumstance causes the

final value are better So the Green Port Construction may be a trend in port

department

In the results of this thesis Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system are better solutions for Green Port Construction And

especially it can be verified that the port rates and charges always affects port

competitiveness Futhermore the investment for Green Port construction and its

effects have to be verified in the future

51

References

1 Hoyle B S and Smith J 1992 Transport and Development In Modern

transport geography edited by B S Hoyle R D Knowles (London Belhaven

Press)pp11-31

2 Beresford A K C De Souza A J R G and Pettit S J 2005 Stategic

development of liner shipping companies and terminal operators Ocean yearbook

19(Chicago 1L The University of Chicago Press) pp 732-750

3 Heaver T D 2002 Supply chain and logistics management implications for

liner shipping In The handbook of maritime economics and business edited by C

Grammenos (LondonLLP) pp 375-396

4 Park T E (2011) A Study on selection criteria of Green Port and evaluation of

major Korean port A masters thesis of graduate school of Incheon university

52

5 JeongBH (2009)Green port management policy directions in the green

growth era- The case of Gwangyang port in Republic of Korea Journal of Korea

Port Economic Association Vol25(3) p361-384

6 Lee J S Han N H(2009) A study on Green Port Revitalization According to

Air Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

7 Lee Y K Nan J W(2010)Green Logistics Policy Analysis and Implications

of Japan

8 Lee B S (2010)Tendency and Countermeasures on Green Logistics in Port

Logistics Company A masters thesis of graduate school of Korean Maritime

university

9 Lee J S (2009) A Study on Green Port Revitalization According to Air

Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

10 Zhang F Y Li Z Lu X J Yao X L(2008)Competitiveness of Inland

Ports Based on F-AHP

11 Port of Long Beach (2009) Green Port Policy wwwpolbcom

12 The port of Los Angeles wwwportoflosangelesorg

5

on the survey data and calculates each indicator importance degree by AHP

method and analysis the result Finally in chapter 5 the conclusion summary the

whole study by the result analysis

6

Chapter 2 Green Port Construction Situation

21 Green Port Construction Background

As the United Nations Secretary General has said the greatest challenge which

we are facing is environmental regulators It is a growing crisis with economic

health and safety food production security and other dimensions

The Kyoto Protocol is an international agreement linked to the United Nations

Framework Convention on Climate Change The major feature of the Kyoto

Protocol is that it sets binding targets for 37 industrialized countries and the

European community for reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to fight

global warming These amount to an average of five percent bellow 1990 level

over the five-year period 2008-2012

The protocol was initially adopted on 11 December 1997 in Japan but all of the

member countries entered into force on16 February 2005 The Kyoto Protocol

7

was adopted in Kyoto Japan on 11 December 1997 and entered into force on 16

February 2005 The detailed rules for the implementation of the Protocol were

adopted at COP 7 in Marrakesh in 2001 and are called the ldquoMarrakesh Accordsrdquo

Follow the ltKyoto Protocolgt several flexible mechanisms are allowed Such

as emissions trading the clean development mechanism (CDM) and joint

implementation The mechanisms allow AnnexⅠcounties to meet their GHG

emission limitations by purchasing GHG emission reductions credits from

elsewhere through financial exchanges projects that reduce emissions in

non-Annex Ⅰ countries or Annex Ⅰ countries with excess allowances The

mechanisms help stimulate green investment and help Parties meet their emission

targets in a cost-effective way

Therefore many countries take action on reducing the GHG discharge emission

For example increase the energy utilization efficiency develop the solar power

wind energy tidal energy and other clean energy in their industry The details

about objective of GHG emission reduction in main countries are displayed as the

following ltTable 1gt

8

ltTable 1gt Objective of CO2 reduce in main countries

Bench

mark of

Year

Objective

()

Absolute

quantity

()

Remark

EU 1990 20~30 -20~-30 Norway New Zealand 40 reducing

USA 2005 17 -3 Passed by House of Representatives

Japan 1990 25 -25 On the premise of attention with China

India

Korea 2020

(BAU) 30 mdashmdash

Discharge amount is up to 564million don

in estimation

China 2005 40~50 60~150

(2005) Each GDP

India 2005 20-25 mdashmdash With the developed countries

participation

Russia 1990 25 -25 Be neutral country

Norway 1990 30~40 -30~-40 mdashmdash

New

Zealand 1990 10~20 -10~ -20 mdashmdash

Austria 2000 5~25 -3~-11 mdashmdash

Canada 2003 20 -3 mdashmdash

Mexico 2002 50 mdashmdash With the developed countries

participation

South

Africa

2020

(BAU) 34 mdashmdash

With the developed countries

participation

Brazil 2020

(BAU) 36~39

-20

(2005) mdashmdash

(Korean Maritime Institute 20095)

9

22 The Definition of Green Port

As the global warming affecting in the world climate has been heavily changed

natural disaster frequently occurred natural resources depletion and supply

imbalance cause crisis to reach a high level For the purpose of getting away from

financial crisis and creating the new growth motivity the counties in the world

make more efforts on developing economic

Because of the realization of this global climate and environment crisis Korean

government had brought out the ldquoGreen Growth Policyrdquo And it made the ldquoGreen

Growth Policyrdquo be embodied and law-governed announced ldquoLow Carbon Green

Growth of the Basic Lawrdquo

In order to coordinate with this policy and law build up the ldquoGreen Growthrdquo

everyone make their efforts and reach ldquoGreen Growthrdquo in Korea each department

As a important industry department port authority also take activity to match the

national strategy of ldquoGreen Growthrdquo and draw up the plan on ldquoGreen Portrdquo

construction

However there isnrsquot a clear definition about the Green Port Korean Land

Transport and Maritime Ministry have explained the Green Port as follows Green

house gas Reducing Energy Effciencing Nature-friendly Port The explanation is

very easy to understand but from a professional point of view it not very

10

comprehensive and concrete So we have to understand the concept in the Green

Port Construction measures and programs There are about 4 kind explanation and

promotion programs in the Green Port Respectively the port which based on

green technology and green business creating new growth motive improving

living standards jumping in the ranks of the advanced port

ltFigure 2gt Green Port appearance and basic definition

In the Green Growth National Strategy Policy there are 10 pieces of policy

directions and 50 researches each department should choose the appropriate one

Follow these researches chose by port availability especially Low Carbon

11

Self-sufficiency Port The Disaster Safety Port Eco-friendly Port Resource

Recycling Port and in this study Green Port construction is a plan on

comprehensive and mix of 4kinds of Green Port Construction

Table 221 Four Promotions for Green Port Construction

Promotion Program

(Green Port type) Activities

Low-Carbon

Self-Sufficiency Port

Eco-friendly inland transportation system building

New renewable resources power equipment utilization

AMP LED utilization

The Disaster Safety

Port

Disaster Prevention environment infrastructure building

Disaster prediction and corresponding system utilization

Eco-Friendly Port Beauty the port by green park planting and so on

Provide eco-friendly port building programs

Resource Recycling

Port

Port waste (silt soil) effectively recycling system

Establish resource recycling port paragon

As table1 shown each type of Green Port has a separate emphasis

Eco-friendly inland transportation system which encourages utilizing rail canal

barge clean system reduces the truck application amount AMP means

Alternative Maritime Power supply system replaces with ship power generation

The Green Port construction in most of counties is the low-carbon self-sufficiency

12

port And in their construction maybe add a few other type promote director like

beauty the port by green park planting and so on

However in this study the Green Port concept is a comprehensive plan among

4 types not a specialization system

23 Green Port Construction Situation in major countries

After ltKyoto protocolgt having brought out each department began to take

affords on the reducing the GHG (greenhouse gas) emission In port department

the activities are embodied in the Green Port construction In this study many

major ports in US EU Japan and Korea are chose to explain for research

231 US

① LALB Port

In order to achieve to reduce marine pollutants standby and build clean port

LALB Port standby resource ministry and environment protection ministry

signed a 5year plan on clean standby action cooperation

This promotion business plan set a set of marine pollutants standby emission

limitation on the ship department from the statistics year 2006-2007 to 2010-2011

handling department heavy duty equipment truck department and so on Such as

13

in Green Port Technology construction department measures and programs are

shown in following Table

Table231 the details of LALB Port Green Port Promotion Programs

Promotion Program

Heavy Equipment Truck

Heavy Equipment

Replace and Update Aging Facilities

Substitute Fuels and Clean Fuel Incentives

Budgetary for the Development of Substitute Fuels

Marine Vessels Tugs

Ship Speed Reduction within the Port

Electrical supply of parking in the Berth

Use low-sulfur fuel (supplementary motor)

Handling Equipment

Air Quality Monitoring

Measure ambient air pollution levels in the vicinity of

the Port

Include a number of real-time air quality measurements

On the restrict situation of heavy equipment trucks and others vessels must to

be replaced and rebuilt in order to minimum the emission of NOx And the trucks

which donrsquot reach the regulate standard do not allowed to get in the port These

regulations will help their owner to replace and update trucks and also set up a

replacement plan to 16000 aging trucks make the replace done by 2012 As

foundation repaired the cargo owner must to pay an addition tax about 20ft 35$

40ft 79$

14

In the maritime department the speed reduction incentive took action in

Jan2005 When ship entry into the port boundary speed must be reduced under

20 miles 12kont At the beginning the effect of this plan is very clearly so the

limitation may be raised to 40mile And AMP (Alternative Maritime Power ) is

encouraged to be built and developed as to ship use their engine and get GHG

emission

② New York- New Jersey Port

The New York- New Jersey Port Authority brought out environment policy on

CO2 emission reduction The main concepts as following first reduce PX SOX

3 each year and CO2 5 Second ship must utilize sulfur-low fuel as a

obligation Third AMP is provided Forth modern the unloading and loading

equipment must be built Fifth promote trucks replacement Sixth reform the ship

engine Seventh invent 9 billion dollars in the following 10 years Eighth invent

to all hybrid equipment (325) Ninth install the hybrid truck in AMPT and

NYCT

③ Seattle Port

15

In Seattle Port Air Environment Maritime Improvement plan has been

accepted in 2005 The plan includes first set up Puget Sound Maritime Air

Forum and make one AMP provide services for two tour ships second change

the diesel hybrid equipment into electric utilization Third use bio-diesel and

diesel catalyst and reduce the emission Forth emphasize the standard and plan of

truck minimum the idling time

Seattle Port Tacoma Port and Vancouver made a assignment and promote

ldquoNorthwest Ports Clean Air Strategyrdquo

④ Auckland Port

Auckland Port set up the aging replacement plan in 2008 and invent 20 milion

dollars gas emission should reach the level And cargo transport system in port

hinterland port authority and Air environment management committee make

cooperation and give an incentive to truck which use new clean technology

Table232 Short term and Long term Green Port Plans in Auckland Port

16

17

232 EU

Rotterdam Port

As the biggest Port in EU Rotterdam Port takes more affords in reducing the

CO2 emission Main programs are low carbon footprint AMP and so on The

limitation of CO2 emission reduces down 50 of 1990 by 2025

In July 2008 the authority of Rotterdam port gave international cooperation

with other ports an extra boost by organizing the World Ports Climate Conference

During this conference the authority of Rotterdam discussed possible ways in

which ports and business could reduce air pollution and CO2 emissions The

proposals the authority of Rotterdam was set out in a declaration which was

supported by all 55 port cities attending the conference The conference resulted

in five projects to improve air quality and reduce CO2 emissions The authority of

Rotterdam is behind the project to further elaborate an Environmental Ship Index

The Rotterdam Climate Initiative is a joint venture with the municipality of

Rotterdam DCMR Environmental Protection Agency Rijnmond and Deltalinqs

Common goal is to halve CO2 emissions in the region by 2025 in comparison with

1990 levels In connection with the Rotterdam Climate Initiative the port works

on (together with DCMR and others) creating an infrastructure for the capture

18

transport and storage of CO2 A business case presented in the summer of 2008 is

now being elaborated into a business plan The business case concludes that

Rotterdam can begin in 2015 with the capture transport and underground storage

of five million tons of CO2 per annum This means that the basic infrastructure

will then be in place for further growth in capture and storage to twenty million

tons in 2025

In 2008 a start was made on the development of a sustainability index for

activities relating to the P for Planet (environment) In 2009 it will further expand

the index to cover the P for People and the P for Profit In the first phase of the

sustainability index CO2 footprint sustainable purchasing sustainable building

and sustainable land allocation will be covered

233 Japan

① Tacoma Port

In the Tacoma Port there are some programs on protecting the air water and

soil environment

In the air protection department ldquoNorthwest Ports Clean Air Strategyrdquo

ldquoGreen Gateway for Traderdquo and ldquoTruck Programrdquo had brought out to against air

pollution The concepts include using ultra-low sulfur diesel bio-diesel and other

cleaner-burning fuels in cargo-handling equipment using low-sulfur distillate

19

fuels at berth adding ldquogreen designrdquo environmental features to ships including

diesel-electric motors that save up to 30 percent in fuel and significantly reduce

emissions setting targets to change older less-efficient truck engines installing

anti-idling devices on rail-switching engines as well as partnering on other

innovative technological advance

The Port of Tacomarsquos four dockside rail yards move cargo quickly and

efficiently from container terminals They also reduce the number of trucks on

city streets and highways Each full train that leaves the Port represents 250 to 300

trucks not on our roads reducing roadway congestion and diesel emissions The

lowest emission route to ship cargo from Asia to the US Midwest is through the

Puget Sound according to the results of a study by Herbert Engineering released

in May 2009

And in the land protection program there are successful clean projects open

spaces and future habitat restoration In 2007 the Port purchased about 70 acres

of open space known as Juliarsquos Gulch and Storey Pit located between the

Tideflats and residential Northeast Tacoma Monitor water quality system is in

utilization in the water department in Tacoma Port

② Tokyo Port

In the Tokyo Port Green Port programs are almost similar with Tacoma Port

e-RTGC (Rubber Tired Gantry Crane) the barge between Tokyo and Yocohama

20

which shorten international maritime container cargo transportation land distance

super eco-shipbuilding technology dissemination and promotion green business

certification operation and shippers and logistics companies support cooperation

③ Osaka Port and Hakata Port

AMP electrical power equipment and solar power equipment are in utilization in

Osaka Port E-RTGC and solar power of refrigerated container are in utilization in

the Hakata Port

234 Korea

In Busan Port a set of Green Port took implementation such as LNG truck

E-RTGC equipment utilization eco-friendly transport means conversion (rail

canal barge) and GHG emission reduction obligation Table233

21

ltTable 233gt Summary of the Main Port of Green Port Measures

COUNTRY PORT MEASURES

US

LALB Port

Green flag AMP discharge gas reduction obligation

recommends use of alternative fuels and clean fuel

funding for the development of alternative fuels facilities

by new engine development instead of NOx emissions

green truck program (reduce70-80) low-sulfur fuel

utilization restore and revitalize the Los Cerritos

Wetlands

New York

Port

AMP modernized facilities utilization high speed hybrid

yard

Auckland

Port

Incentives on the new cleaning technology containers

transportation system

Seattle Port

AMP green ship membership Tier 4 level reducing PM

by 1994 level Smart Way program Northwest Ports

Clean Air Strategy

EU Rotterdam

Port

Clean engine (barge) green ship membership carbon

footprint calculation cruise ship which under port

authority change to use low-sulfur fuel low emission

engine development and utilization Green Award AMP

ship recycling incentives

Japan

Tokyo Port

RTGC (Rubber Tired Gantry Crane) apply for the barge

between Tokyo and Yocohama shorten international

maritime container cargo transportation land distance

super eco-shipbuilding technology dissemination and

promotion green business certification operation

shippers and logistics companies support cooperation

Osaka Port AMP electrical power equipment solar power equipment

Hakata Port E-RTGC solar power utilization in refrigerated container

Korea Busan Port

LNG truck E-RTGC eco-friendly transport means

conversion (rail canal barge) GHG emission reduction

obligation

22

24 Green Port Indicators Research

As the previous section list shown Green Port measures and programs are

substantially the same

When a ship entry in the port boundary from voyage many ports give a

incentive on shifting and utilizing sulfur-low fuel and reducing the speed under

20 miles when the ship berth in the port the alternative maritime power are

provided which replace its power generation

Next in the cargo unloading and loading department the same with above

utilization of sulfur-low fuel and electrical equipment are promoted and

eco-driving education to driver is necessary what speed is fuel fully burning and

emission minimum point

In the cargo transport department in other words truck department the

replacement on aging trucks is popular in many ports aging trucks are prohibited

close to port at the same time an incentive or support function are provided on

aging replacement The automated equipments are recommended to utilize in the

Green Port like hybrid yard tractor And a perfect plan on truck running also could

reduce the idling time and against the emission of CO2

The details reference the following Table 241

23

Table241 Green Port measures in port each department

Emission reduction programs

Ship

department

Shipping

in the

port

boundary

Obligation on the utilization of sulfur-low fuel

Reform ship engine and utilize hybrid

Speed reduce in the port entrance(a off-shore fee

incentive)

Off-shore AMP

Shift utilization system of clean fuel

Unloading and loading

department

Obligation on the utilization of sulfur-low fuel

Replace electrical equipment

Eco-driving

Truck department Hybrid yard tractor utilization

Promote aging truck replacement

Minimum the idling time

Others LED light in the Port

Develop renew and recycle resource energy

The Green Port measures in this study are e-RTGC AMP AGV Green Ship

certification system incentives on the new clean technology Green Flag(speed

reduction incentive)eco-friendly transport means conversion joint distribution

the cost on account of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction polities and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

The details and definition on each Green Port measure and the relationship with

Port Competitiveness will be expressed in next chapter

24

Chapter 3 The Relationship between Port

Competitiveness and Green Port Construction

31 Port Competitiveness Literature Review

Although past studies on port selection models have focused on port selection

made by port facilities port services port rates and charge and location

Murphy made a survey between 534 shipping companies and port authorities in

1989 and between 1850 shipping companies and port authorities in 1992

Comparing with other papers Murphys got a survey among more widely

objects In his paper port selection(port competitiveness) was seen to affected by

facilities situation appropriate pilotage max ship entrance probability the

25

capability of handling non-regular cargos whether to provide information of ship

nationality or not and port services level

In French model (1979) there are two factors affecting the port selection (port

competitiveness) endogenous factor and exogenous factor In endogenous factors

there are adequacy and physical plant condition of terminal facilities terminal rate

and charges frequency and geographic coverage of ship and freight services the

capacity of connecting to inland rails or transport net and the services provides for

the shipping or logistics And exogenous factors included the size and economic

capacity of hinterland as a source exports or market for imports national

economic situation trade policy and support established by government the

situation at home and abroad

The same as Frenchs paper in Paters paper in 1990 there are endogenous and

exogenous factors too In endogenous there are the services provides for the

shipping or logistics capacity of terminal facilities situation and condition of

facilities operation strategies established by port authority convenience to utilize

And the political situation at home and abroad social change economic factor

stabilized labor and capital However in 2004 there is a tremendous change in

Peters new paper There are four parts multi-modal process interface transport

modes infrastructure Multi-model Process part includes ship entrance rapid

speed and accuracy shipper and shipping companies reactive operation flexibility

Interface includes labor power information technology and so on And there are

26

ship calls frequency and amount of fleet factors in the transport modes part In the

infrastructure part includes port facility equipments and so on

Port facilities rates and charges services inland situation and social

circumstance factors affect the port selection and competitiveness a lot from the

research until 1992 by Murphy And in Lirn and Pater research 2003-2004 the

new and detail factors are shown to us

We can clearly see the contents in next table

27

Table 311 Prevention literature research results

Influence factors

French

(1979)

Endogenous

port facilities port rate and charges calls frequency port services

port connection with inland

Exogenous

economic size of hinterland national economic situation trade

policy home and abroad situation

Willingale

(1982)

voyage distance economy size entrance to port and route port

facilities max ship entrance probability port operation rates and

charges port authority scale of port

Slack

(1985)

cost of inland transportation port proximity ship demurrage

multi-transport

Peter

(1990)

Endogenous

port facilities condition of facilities operation strategies

convenience to utilize

Exogenous

political situation social change economic factor stabilized labor

and capital

UNCTAD

(1992)

port facilities services location level of financial industry

information communication system social circumstances economic

stability

Murphy

(1992)

facilities situation appropriate pilotage max ship entrance

probability the capability of handling non-regular cargos whether to

provide information of ship nationality or not port services level

Lirn

(2003-2004)

physical and technologic facilities geopolitical location port

operation and management shipping and terminal cost

Peter

(2004)

Multi-modal Process

ship entrance rapid speed and accuracy shipper and shipping

companies reactive operation flexibility

Interface labor and capital

Transport modes ship calls frequency and amount of fleet factors

28

And there are many experts and scholars research for the influence factors to

port selection and competitiveness in Korea The specific content follows table5

Table 312 Literature research in Korean academia

Influence factors

Jeon Il-su (1992) location facilities charges service level (EDI) terminal operation

port authority

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

( 1993 )

location facilities throughput charges service operation

situation

Kim Hak-so

(1993)

export shipping amount of annual cost of each ton of cargo

marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km of

cargo loading time

import marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km

of cargo amount of liner ship

Yeo Gi-tae (1996) location facilities throughput charge service operation situation

Ha Dong-u amp

Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

location facilities service level logistics charges environment of

logistics service

Yeo Gi-tae (1999) location facilities throughput charges service

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

throughput quay length yard area GNP

Kum Jong-su

(2001)

distance between port and cargo site terminal facilities service

the capacity of multi-transport capacity of cargo handling

administrative service rates and charges of inland transport

congestion

Yeo Gi-tae (2002) location throughput facilities service level

Kim Jin-gu (2002) port facilities location cargo amount rates and charges services

29

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005)

voyage degree to attract cargo cargo handling cost amount of

handling cargo connection to inland service reliability location

berth availability quay length feeder network depth

transshipment volumes cargo security profitability

offing degree to attract cargo berth availability cargo handling

cost transshipment volumes

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005)

cargo handling amount port facilities location rates and charges

level of service

Heo Yun-su

(2005)

port facilities rates and charges services marketing geopolitics

location economic and social circumstance

Kim Geun-seop

(2007)

port services facilities cargo handling amount location cost

productivity factor global factor

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) rates and charges services port characteristics

Many experts and scholars make a research on port selection and

competitiveness recently But the factors selection criteria are difference

Nevertheless the main factors are facilities services cost and so on

Therefore port competitiveness factors which chose in this study are port

facilities port services port rates and charges and social circumstance

However the main factors are not the whole factors any more more and more

detail factors and characteristic factors appearance Port selection and

competitiveness factors have changed And the development content is introduced

in next part

30

32 Port Competitiveness Development Tree

As mentioned above port facilities port rates and charges and port location are

the basic factors in the port selection and competitiveness

From the following table we can discover that first one facilities rates and

charges and location are the most important factor in port selection and

competitiveness second one the importance of social circumstance turns larger

inland connection is necessary all the time

Table 321 Main factor in the Pretentious Research

31

port facilities rates and

charges

inland

connection

social

circumstance location

French (1979) radic radic radic

Wiliingale (1982) radic radic

Slack (1985) radic

Pater (1990) radic radic

UNCTAD (1992) radic radic radic

Murphy(1992) radic

Jeon Il-su (1992) radic radic radic

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

(1993)

radic radic radic

Kim Hak-so

(1993) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1996) radic radic radic

Ha Dong-u

amp Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1998) radic radic radic

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

radic

Kum Jong-su

(2001) radic radic radic radic

Kim Jin-gu(2002) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(2002) radic radic

Lirn(2003-2004) radic radic radic

Pater(2004) radic

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005) radic radic radic

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005) radic radic radic

Heo Yun-su

(2005) radic radic radic radic

Kim Geun-seop

(2007) radic radic radic radic

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) radic

32

33 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green

Port Construction

Following the research above Port facilities rates and charges inland

connection and social circumstance are chose in this study port selection and

competitiveness department

e-RTGC Electric rubber tired gantry crane is a mobile gantry crane used for

stacking intermodal containers within the stacking areas of a container terminal

e-RTGC are used at container terminals and container storage yards to straddling

multiple lanes of railroad and container storage or when maximum storage

density in the container stack is desired

AMP is shorted for Alternative Marine Power and Itrsquos a facility which

provides the electric system in the land for ship which entry in the port The

facility can reduce emissions which ship get entrance in the port

AGV is a mobile robot that follows markers or wires in the floor or uses

vision or lasers They are most often used in industrial applications to move

materials around a manufacturing facility or a warehouse Automatic Guided

Vehicle systems work around-the-clock making continuous flow and just-in-time

delivery easier to achieve Application of the automatic guided vehicle has broade

33

ned during the late 20th century and they are no longer restricted to industrial

environments

The e-RTGC AMP and AGV are the new clean facilities and equipments in the

Green Port they donrsquot reduce the efficiency of handling cargo and they also

reduce the CO2 emission account

Green ship certification system if a ship utilizes clean and CO2 emission

reduction technology on the ship building adds equipment and management and

son on certification would be received And the port authority gives some

incentive and preferential treatment among 45 ports Such as a better schedule is

provided for green membership ship priority in handing cargo and discount on

entrance fee

Incentives on the new cleaning technology There are two expressions about

this measure one is that the port authority give a incentive to ship which have a

great utilization on the new cleaning technology and the other one is that

environment provide many incentives to the authority which utilize the new

cleaning technology in the port such as LED street lamp solar power cranes

Green flag The Green Flag incentive program was set up to encourage ships to

slow down in order to improve air quality The Green Flag program provides

approximately $2 million a year in discounts for vessel operators who slow their

ships to 12 knots (22kmh) or less within 20miles (32km) of the harbor

34

According to the Port the Green Flag program reduced air pollution by 600tons in

2007 and is expected to do better in 2008

All of Green ship certification system incentives on the new cleaning

technology and Green Flag are incentives provided for users of port and aimed at

reduce port rates and charges So the 3 measures belong to affect port rates and

charges

Eco-friendly transport means conversion Eco-friendly means of transport are

much accounted of green port for example railway discharge less GHG emission

than truck barge with a clean engine among the river and inshore canal

Joint distribution joint distribution is a collaborative system which port

provides among many logistics companies It can make the cargo handling speed

rapidly and reduce cargo storage time for CO2 emission reducing such as

refrigerated container In an addition it also makes the logistics companies

transport more efficient

Cost on amount of CO2 emission differenced from other port the cost on

amount of CO2 is included in the port cost The cost aims to reduce the CO2

emission directly

CO2 emission reduction policies compared with other traditional port Green

Port gives more cost discount and incentives but in an addition there are many

policies on CO2 emission restriction Such as aging trucks restrictions in inland

transport department ship entry speed reduced and fuel changed in the ship

35

department and so on Whether these restriction policies constrain port

development or not and the degree of these policies constrain port development

will be explain by the AHP results

Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors some ports in the

western countries are opened as a travel place for visitors so as to change the

polluted impress and raise the position in our heart

Cost on amount of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction policies and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors can affect the social

circumstance factor Whether these measures can or not improve the social

circumstance and port competitiveness we have to see the next calculation and

results

36

Chapter 4 The Green Port Competitiveness

Analysis

41 The Green Port Competitiveness Model by AHP

The AHP is one multi-criteria decision making method which has been

extensively applied to a variety of decision-making situations The multi-criteria

techniques are considered to be a promising framework for evaluation of

decision-making factors since they have the potential to take into account

conflicting multidimensional incommensurable and uncertain effects of

decisions explicitly

In order to apply the AHP method a hierarchical decision schema was

constructed by decomposing the decision problem into its decision elements

37

After that the importance or preferences of the decision elements are examined in

a pair-wise comparison to the elements in the hierarchy The parameters are

estimated using pair-wise comparisons between the importance of the attribute or

decision element in the function using data made by each responder Making

comparisons is a question of which of the two attributes is more import as well as

how much more important

Follow these theories the Green Port Competitiveness Model choose factors as

follow in port competitiveness factors part there are port facilities port rates and

charges inland connection social circumstance in Green Port construction part

there are e-RTGC AMP AGV green ship certification system green flag

incentives on the new cleaning technology eco-friendly transport means

conversion joint distribution CO2 emission reduction policies cost on amount of

CO2 emission beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

38

Figure 41 Green Port Competitiveness AHP model

Follow the Green Port Competitiveness AHP as shown we set a questionnaire

survey to many experts scholars working in logistics system area And we got 15

ones and 14 ones results are believable and integrated

42 Green Port Competitiveness Analysis

39

The key to construction of the factors which affects the port competitiveness

is to determine the conceptual model The selection of the factors directly affects

the evaluation of the result In order to ensure the accuracy objectivity and

practicality of evaluation results the following basic principles must be followed

when selecting factors systematic principles the principle of universal

comparability practical principle and goal-oriented principle In view of the

foregoing the competitiveness which affected by Green Port construction model

is made The analysis follows established principles of port competitiveness

evaluation taking into account the characteristics and functions of the port as well

as port facilities port services port rates and charges ship entrance inland

connection social circumstances and so on

(1) Port facilities

e-RTGC U11 AMP U12 AGV U13

(2) Port rates and charges

Green ship certification system U21 Incentives on the new clean

technology U22 Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

(3) Inland connection

Eco-friendly means of transport U31 Joint distribution U32

(4) Social circumstances

40

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41 CO2 emission reduction policies

U42 Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors U43

Table 421 Details of Level I and Level II values

Level I

indicators Symbol Level II indicators Symbol

Port facilities A1

e-RTGC U11

AMP U12

AGV U13

Port rates and

charges A2

Green ship certification system U21

Incentives on the new clean technology U22

Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

Inland

connection A3

Eco-friendly means of transport U31

Joint distribution U32

Social

circumstances A4

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41

CO2 emissions reduction policies U42

Beautiful environment construction in inner

harbors U43

41

I Determination of level I indicator weights

As the ports competitiveness evaluation indicators at this level are complex

and the elements are not easily quantified AHP is adopted to determine the

indicator weights with the basic steps as follows

(1) Establish a comparative judgment matrix The comparative judgment

matrix is obtained through comparing contributed proportion of multiple

indicators to the overall target by the judgment scale wherein the fuzzy

judgment number introduced is 1 3 5 7 and 9 and the reciprocal of

such number indicates the important degree of one element relatively to

another The results are shown in next table

Table 422 Comparison matrix of level I indicators

A1 A2 A3 A4

A1 1 15 13 3

A2 5 1 3 7

A3 3 13 1 5

A4 13 17 15 1

(2) Calculate the characteristic vector of the comparative judgment matrix

which refers to the weighted vector of the indicator The writer adopts

42

the geometric method to calculate the characteristic vector The

calculated result is as follows

ω=(012 0560 026 006)T λmax=418 It can be obtained from the table

RI=09 Wherein ω is the characteristic vector corresponding to the

maximum characteristic value λmax of the comparative judgment matrix

namely the weighted vector of the indicator RI is the average

consistency indicator as shown in following table

Table423 Average random consistency indicator RI

Matrix Order

RI

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

0 0 058 09 112 124 132 141

Matrix Order

RI

9 10 11 12 13 14 15

145 149 152 154 156 158 159

(3) Conduct consistency check on the comparative judgment matrix Adopt

the random consistency proportion CR to judge the consistency of the

comparative judgment matrix According to CI= (λmax -n)(n-1) and

CR=CIRI it can be obtained through calculation CR=007lt01 Thus

this comparative judgment matrix has a satisfactory consistency and the

indicator weight coefficient calculated through this matrix is acceptable

43

II Determination of level II indicator weights

The data at this level are the details of level Ⅰ indicator The judgment

matrix obtained through comparing multiple sub-indicators under Level Ⅰ

indicators is adopted to determine the weights of sub-indicators under each

indicator one by one The specific steps are as follows

(1) The experts score the weights within the given range To determine the

weights of several small indicators under the same big indicator it is

supposed that the score of small indicator ｋ under the indicator j made

by the expert i is Xijk wherein i=12n n is the total number of

experts ј=12m m is the total number of LevelⅡ indicator к

=12Oj Oj is the number of small indicators under the big indicator ј

іјк IJK LRC l I j k

(2) The credit rating of the expert і is l l =1 2 3 l =1 indicates this expert

is quite familiar with the evaluated contents l =2 indicator this expert is

44

with the evaluated contents l =3 indicates this expert is not quite familiar

with the evaluated contents yi1 is the=08 yi2 =05 and yi3=1

(3) The comprehensive evaluation score of small indicator l under the

indicator j is as follows

(4) The formula for normalization processing of indicator weights is as

follows and the absolute weight of the indicator set is marked as

q=(q1q2q11)

(5) Because of the same justification and principle we donrsquot give the detail

about the calculation The same with the level Ⅰ calculation we

manipulation data one by one and get 14 results And obtain the average

45

results by weighted average method The results detail as Table for the

final weights of Level-Ⅱ evaluation indicators

Above the calculation process and method are just one of data from the

questionable surveys In this study the final results are got from the

weighted average by the results of each questionable survey

The final results are shown as Table424

Table424 Indicator weights table of indicator system

Level I

indicators Weight LevelⅡ indicators

Relative

weight

Absolute

weight

Importance

percentage

Port Facilities

A1 02735

e-RTGC U11 05506 01506 1506

AMP U12 01648 00451 451

AGV U13 02826 00773 773

Port Rates and

Charges A2

02902

Green ship certification s

ystem U21 04724 01371 1371

Incentives on the new

clean technology U22 02871 00833 833

Green Flag (speed

reduction incentive)U23 02405 00698 698

Inland

connection A3

02865

Eco-friendly means of

transport U31 05942 01702 1702

Joint distribution U32 04058 01163 1163

Social

environmentA4 00863

Cost on amount of CO2

emission U41 03698 00319 319

CO2 emissions reduction

policies U42 02273 00196 196

Beautiful environment

construction in inner

harbors U43

04029 00348 348

46

III Case study

In the questionable survey we also got the mark of Green Port measures

evaluation value of many main ports such as Singapore Port Shanghai Port

Hongkong Port Busan Port LALB Port Rotterdam Port and Yocohama Port

The highest mark is 5 and lowest one is 1

Table425 Evaluation value of many main ports

Singapore

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

LALB

Port

Rotterdam

Port

Yocohama

Port

Port facilities 38000 36000 34000 38182 38000 42000 32000

Port rates and

charges 32000 36000 31000 35455 32000 39000 33000

Inland

connection 39000 34545 35000 29091 35000 45000 36000

Social

circumstance 42000 32727 41000 32000 38000 42727 36000

With the Green Port and Port competitiveness indicator weights results these

ports got the final evaluation value

47

Table426 Final evaluation value on main ports Green Port measures and

competitiveness

Rotterdam

Port

Singapore

Port

LALB

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

Yocohama

Port

394 345 330 330 319 318 317

43 Results Analysis

From the results table we can obtain the many results as following

① The main Green Port measures which are more important to improve port

competitiveness are Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system the indicator weights are 01702 01506 and

01371 among the 11 indicators

② In the Green Port construction Cost on amount of CO2 emission and CO2

emissions reduction policies are the restrictions indicators but the weight

of two indicators are not big 00319 and 00196 So effect on Green Port

construction to port competitiveness does have the weaken capacity but

not clearly strengthen more clearly Thus Green Port construction really

could improve the port competitiveness

48

③ In the case study traditional ports Rotterdam and Singapore Port give us

better examples on Green Port construction especially Rotterdam Port

④ Hongkong Busan and Yocohama Port all got a lower evaluation value

But in detail Hongkong and Yocohama Port got a lower on the port

facilities and rates and charges Busan Port got a higher on the port

facilities and rates and charges but a lower on the inland connection and

social circumstance

⑤ Shanghai Port doesnrsquot have Particular strength factors but the

comprehensive strength is not bad the same as LALB Port

49

Chapter 5 Conclusion

In this thesis the effects of Green Port construction for improving the port

competitiveness have been studied Under the definition of Green Port the

characteristics of Green Port and its effects has been shown by analysing the AHP

method which based on the questionary survey for Green Port specialists and port

officers

Follow the results of analysis on Green Port competitiveness AHP model

Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green ship certification system is

better for Green Port Construction welcome for shipping companies and citizens

who live around the port And in the analysis of Port competitiveness factors port

rates and charges always affects port competitiveness a lot As a trend inland

connection factor abstracts more attention of shipping companies

50

On the trend of port department each port should take a activity to adjust

strategy for improving its competitiveness Such as in the main ports evaluation

Busan port get a high value on port rates and charges and port facilities but as a

lower value on inland connection factor the final value is not as well as we look

forward In the evaluation of Singapore Port through it gets a lower value on rates

and charges higher value on inland connection and social circumstance causes the

final value are better So the Green Port Construction may be a trend in port

department

In the results of this thesis Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system are better solutions for Green Port Construction And

especially it can be verified that the port rates and charges always affects port

competitiveness Futhermore the investment for Green Port construction and its

effects have to be verified in the future

51

References

1 Hoyle B S and Smith J 1992 Transport and Development In Modern

transport geography edited by B S Hoyle R D Knowles (London Belhaven

Press)pp11-31

2 Beresford A K C De Souza A J R G and Pettit S J 2005 Stategic

development of liner shipping companies and terminal operators Ocean yearbook

19(Chicago 1L The University of Chicago Press) pp 732-750

3 Heaver T D 2002 Supply chain and logistics management implications for

liner shipping In The handbook of maritime economics and business edited by C

Grammenos (LondonLLP) pp 375-396

4 Park T E (2011) A Study on selection criteria of Green Port and evaluation of

major Korean port A masters thesis of graduate school of Incheon university

52

5 JeongBH (2009)Green port management policy directions in the green

growth era- The case of Gwangyang port in Republic of Korea Journal of Korea

Port Economic Association Vol25(3) p361-384

6 Lee J S Han N H(2009) A study on Green Port Revitalization According to

Air Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

7 Lee Y K Nan J W(2010)Green Logistics Policy Analysis and Implications

of Japan

8 Lee B S (2010)Tendency and Countermeasures on Green Logistics in Port

Logistics Company A masters thesis of graduate school of Korean Maritime

university

9 Lee J S (2009) A Study on Green Port Revitalization According to Air

Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

10 Zhang F Y Li Z Lu X J Yao X L(2008)Competitiveness of Inland

Ports Based on F-AHP

11 Port of Long Beach (2009) Green Port Policy wwwpolbcom

12 The port of Los Angeles wwwportoflosangelesorg

6

Chapter 2 Green Port Construction Situation

21 Green Port Construction Background

As the United Nations Secretary General has said the greatest challenge which

we are facing is environmental regulators It is a growing crisis with economic

health and safety food production security and other dimensions

The Kyoto Protocol is an international agreement linked to the United Nations

Framework Convention on Climate Change The major feature of the Kyoto

Protocol is that it sets binding targets for 37 industrialized countries and the

European community for reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to fight

global warming These amount to an average of five percent bellow 1990 level

over the five-year period 2008-2012

The protocol was initially adopted on 11 December 1997 in Japan but all of the

member countries entered into force on16 February 2005 The Kyoto Protocol

7

was adopted in Kyoto Japan on 11 December 1997 and entered into force on 16

February 2005 The detailed rules for the implementation of the Protocol were

adopted at COP 7 in Marrakesh in 2001 and are called the ldquoMarrakesh Accordsrdquo

Follow the ltKyoto Protocolgt several flexible mechanisms are allowed Such

as emissions trading the clean development mechanism (CDM) and joint

implementation The mechanisms allow AnnexⅠcounties to meet their GHG

emission limitations by purchasing GHG emission reductions credits from

elsewhere through financial exchanges projects that reduce emissions in

non-Annex Ⅰ countries or Annex Ⅰ countries with excess allowances The

mechanisms help stimulate green investment and help Parties meet their emission

targets in a cost-effective way

Therefore many countries take action on reducing the GHG discharge emission

For example increase the energy utilization efficiency develop the solar power

wind energy tidal energy and other clean energy in their industry The details

about objective of GHG emission reduction in main countries are displayed as the

following ltTable 1gt

8

ltTable 1gt Objective of CO2 reduce in main countries

Bench

mark of

Year

Objective

()

Absolute

quantity

()

Remark

EU 1990 20~30 -20~-30 Norway New Zealand 40 reducing

USA 2005 17 -3 Passed by House of Representatives

Japan 1990 25 -25 On the premise of attention with China

India

Korea 2020

(BAU) 30 mdashmdash

Discharge amount is up to 564million don

in estimation

China 2005 40~50 60~150

(2005) Each GDP

India 2005 20-25 mdashmdash With the developed countries

participation

Russia 1990 25 -25 Be neutral country

Norway 1990 30~40 -30~-40 mdashmdash

New

Zealand 1990 10~20 -10~ -20 mdashmdash

Austria 2000 5~25 -3~-11 mdashmdash

Canada 2003 20 -3 mdashmdash

Mexico 2002 50 mdashmdash With the developed countries

participation

South

Africa

2020

(BAU) 34 mdashmdash

With the developed countries

participation

Brazil 2020

(BAU) 36~39

-20

(2005) mdashmdash

(Korean Maritime Institute 20095)

9

22 The Definition of Green Port

As the global warming affecting in the world climate has been heavily changed

natural disaster frequently occurred natural resources depletion and supply

imbalance cause crisis to reach a high level For the purpose of getting away from

financial crisis and creating the new growth motivity the counties in the world

make more efforts on developing economic

Because of the realization of this global climate and environment crisis Korean

government had brought out the ldquoGreen Growth Policyrdquo And it made the ldquoGreen

Growth Policyrdquo be embodied and law-governed announced ldquoLow Carbon Green

Growth of the Basic Lawrdquo

In order to coordinate with this policy and law build up the ldquoGreen Growthrdquo

everyone make their efforts and reach ldquoGreen Growthrdquo in Korea each department

As a important industry department port authority also take activity to match the

national strategy of ldquoGreen Growthrdquo and draw up the plan on ldquoGreen Portrdquo

construction

However there isnrsquot a clear definition about the Green Port Korean Land

Transport and Maritime Ministry have explained the Green Port as follows Green

house gas Reducing Energy Effciencing Nature-friendly Port The explanation is

very easy to understand but from a professional point of view it not very

10

comprehensive and concrete So we have to understand the concept in the Green

Port Construction measures and programs There are about 4 kind explanation and

promotion programs in the Green Port Respectively the port which based on

green technology and green business creating new growth motive improving

living standards jumping in the ranks of the advanced port

ltFigure 2gt Green Port appearance and basic definition

In the Green Growth National Strategy Policy there are 10 pieces of policy

directions and 50 researches each department should choose the appropriate one

Follow these researches chose by port availability especially Low Carbon

11

Self-sufficiency Port The Disaster Safety Port Eco-friendly Port Resource

Recycling Port and in this study Green Port construction is a plan on

comprehensive and mix of 4kinds of Green Port Construction

Table 221 Four Promotions for Green Port Construction

Promotion Program

(Green Port type) Activities

Low-Carbon

Self-Sufficiency Port

Eco-friendly inland transportation system building

New renewable resources power equipment utilization

AMP LED utilization

The Disaster Safety

Port

Disaster Prevention environment infrastructure building

Disaster prediction and corresponding system utilization

Eco-Friendly Port Beauty the port by green park planting and so on

Provide eco-friendly port building programs

Resource Recycling

Port

Port waste (silt soil) effectively recycling system

Establish resource recycling port paragon

As table1 shown each type of Green Port has a separate emphasis

Eco-friendly inland transportation system which encourages utilizing rail canal

barge clean system reduces the truck application amount AMP means

Alternative Maritime Power supply system replaces with ship power generation

The Green Port construction in most of counties is the low-carbon self-sufficiency

12

port And in their construction maybe add a few other type promote director like

beauty the port by green park planting and so on

However in this study the Green Port concept is a comprehensive plan among

4 types not a specialization system

23 Green Port Construction Situation in major countries

After ltKyoto protocolgt having brought out each department began to take

affords on the reducing the GHG (greenhouse gas) emission In port department

the activities are embodied in the Green Port construction In this study many

major ports in US EU Japan and Korea are chose to explain for research

231 US

① LALB Port

In order to achieve to reduce marine pollutants standby and build clean port

LALB Port standby resource ministry and environment protection ministry

signed a 5year plan on clean standby action cooperation

This promotion business plan set a set of marine pollutants standby emission

limitation on the ship department from the statistics year 2006-2007 to 2010-2011

handling department heavy duty equipment truck department and so on Such as

13

in Green Port Technology construction department measures and programs are

shown in following Table

Table231 the details of LALB Port Green Port Promotion Programs

Promotion Program

Heavy Equipment Truck

Heavy Equipment

Replace and Update Aging Facilities

Substitute Fuels and Clean Fuel Incentives

Budgetary for the Development of Substitute Fuels

Marine Vessels Tugs

Ship Speed Reduction within the Port

Electrical supply of parking in the Berth

Use low-sulfur fuel (supplementary motor)

Handling Equipment

Air Quality Monitoring

Measure ambient air pollution levels in the vicinity of

the Port

Include a number of real-time air quality measurements

On the restrict situation of heavy equipment trucks and others vessels must to

be replaced and rebuilt in order to minimum the emission of NOx And the trucks

which donrsquot reach the regulate standard do not allowed to get in the port These

regulations will help their owner to replace and update trucks and also set up a

replacement plan to 16000 aging trucks make the replace done by 2012 As

foundation repaired the cargo owner must to pay an addition tax about 20ft 35$

40ft 79$

14

In the maritime department the speed reduction incentive took action in

Jan2005 When ship entry into the port boundary speed must be reduced under

20 miles 12kont At the beginning the effect of this plan is very clearly so the

limitation may be raised to 40mile And AMP (Alternative Maritime Power ) is

encouraged to be built and developed as to ship use their engine and get GHG

emission

② New York- New Jersey Port

The New York- New Jersey Port Authority brought out environment policy on

CO2 emission reduction The main concepts as following first reduce PX SOX

3 each year and CO2 5 Second ship must utilize sulfur-low fuel as a

obligation Third AMP is provided Forth modern the unloading and loading

equipment must be built Fifth promote trucks replacement Sixth reform the ship

engine Seventh invent 9 billion dollars in the following 10 years Eighth invent

to all hybrid equipment (325) Ninth install the hybrid truck in AMPT and

NYCT

③ Seattle Port

15

In Seattle Port Air Environment Maritime Improvement plan has been

accepted in 2005 The plan includes first set up Puget Sound Maritime Air

Forum and make one AMP provide services for two tour ships second change

the diesel hybrid equipment into electric utilization Third use bio-diesel and

diesel catalyst and reduce the emission Forth emphasize the standard and plan of

truck minimum the idling time

Seattle Port Tacoma Port and Vancouver made a assignment and promote

ldquoNorthwest Ports Clean Air Strategyrdquo

④ Auckland Port

Auckland Port set up the aging replacement plan in 2008 and invent 20 milion

dollars gas emission should reach the level And cargo transport system in port

hinterland port authority and Air environment management committee make

cooperation and give an incentive to truck which use new clean technology

Table232 Short term and Long term Green Port Plans in Auckland Port

16

17

232 EU

Rotterdam Port

As the biggest Port in EU Rotterdam Port takes more affords in reducing the

CO2 emission Main programs are low carbon footprint AMP and so on The

limitation of CO2 emission reduces down 50 of 1990 by 2025

In July 2008 the authority of Rotterdam port gave international cooperation

with other ports an extra boost by organizing the World Ports Climate Conference

During this conference the authority of Rotterdam discussed possible ways in

which ports and business could reduce air pollution and CO2 emissions The

proposals the authority of Rotterdam was set out in a declaration which was

supported by all 55 port cities attending the conference The conference resulted

in five projects to improve air quality and reduce CO2 emissions The authority of

Rotterdam is behind the project to further elaborate an Environmental Ship Index

The Rotterdam Climate Initiative is a joint venture with the municipality of

Rotterdam DCMR Environmental Protection Agency Rijnmond and Deltalinqs

Common goal is to halve CO2 emissions in the region by 2025 in comparison with

1990 levels In connection with the Rotterdam Climate Initiative the port works

on (together with DCMR and others) creating an infrastructure for the capture

18

transport and storage of CO2 A business case presented in the summer of 2008 is

now being elaborated into a business plan The business case concludes that

Rotterdam can begin in 2015 with the capture transport and underground storage

of five million tons of CO2 per annum This means that the basic infrastructure

will then be in place for further growth in capture and storage to twenty million

tons in 2025

In 2008 a start was made on the development of a sustainability index for

activities relating to the P for Planet (environment) In 2009 it will further expand

the index to cover the P for People and the P for Profit In the first phase of the

sustainability index CO2 footprint sustainable purchasing sustainable building

and sustainable land allocation will be covered

233 Japan

① Tacoma Port

In the Tacoma Port there are some programs on protecting the air water and

soil environment

In the air protection department ldquoNorthwest Ports Clean Air Strategyrdquo

ldquoGreen Gateway for Traderdquo and ldquoTruck Programrdquo had brought out to against air

pollution The concepts include using ultra-low sulfur diesel bio-diesel and other

cleaner-burning fuels in cargo-handling equipment using low-sulfur distillate

19

fuels at berth adding ldquogreen designrdquo environmental features to ships including

diesel-electric motors that save up to 30 percent in fuel and significantly reduce

emissions setting targets to change older less-efficient truck engines installing

anti-idling devices on rail-switching engines as well as partnering on other

innovative technological advance

The Port of Tacomarsquos four dockside rail yards move cargo quickly and

efficiently from container terminals They also reduce the number of trucks on

city streets and highways Each full train that leaves the Port represents 250 to 300

trucks not on our roads reducing roadway congestion and diesel emissions The

lowest emission route to ship cargo from Asia to the US Midwest is through the

Puget Sound according to the results of a study by Herbert Engineering released

in May 2009

And in the land protection program there are successful clean projects open

spaces and future habitat restoration In 2007 the Port purchased about 70 acres

of open space known as Juliarsquos Gulch and Storey Pit located between the

Tideflats and residential Northeast Tacoma Monitor water quality system is in

utilization in the water department in Tacoma Port

② Tokyo Port

In the Tokyo Port Green Port programs are almost similar with Tacoma Port

e-RTGC (Rubber Tired Gantry Crane) the barge between Tokyo and Yocohama

20

which shorten international maritime container cargo transportation land distance

super eco-shipbuilding technology dissemination and promotion green business

certification operation and shippers and logistics companies support cooperation

③ Osaka Port and Hakata Port

AMP electrical power equipment and solar power equipment are in utilization in

Osaka Port E-RTGC and solar power of refrigerated container are in utilization in

the Hakata Port

234 Korea

In Busan Port a set of Green Port took implementation such as LNG truck

E-RTGC equipment utilization eco-friendly transport means conversion (rail

canal barge) and GHG emission reduction obligation Table233

21

ltTable 233gt Summary of the Main Port of Green Port Measures

COUNTRY PORT MEASURES

US

LALB Port

Green flag AMP discharge gas reduction obligation

recommends use of alternative fuels and clean fuel

funding for the development of alternative fuels facilities

by new engine development instead of NOx emissions

green truck program (reduce70-80) low-sulfur fuel

utilization restore and revitalize the Los Cerritos

Wetlands

New York

Port

AMP modernized facilities utilization high speed hybrid

yard

Auckland

Port

Incentives on the new cleaning technology containers

transportation system

Seattle Port

AMP green ship membership Tier 4 level reducing PM

by 1994 level Smart Way program Northwest Ports

Clean Air Strategy

EU Rotterdam

Port

Clean engine (barge) green ship membership carbon

footprint calculation cruise ship which under port

authority change to use low-sulfur fuel low emission

engine development and utilization Green Award AMP

ship recycling incentives

Japan

Tokyo Port

RTGC (Rubber Tired Gantry Crane) apply for the barge

between Tokyo and Yocohama shorten international

maritime container cargo transportation land distance

super eco-shipbuilding technology dissemination and

promotion green business certification operation

shippers and logistics companies support cooperation

Osaka Port AMP electrical power equipment solar power equipment

Hakata Port E-RTGC solar power utilization in refrigerated container

Korea Busan Port

LNG truck E-RTGC eco-friendly transport means

conversion (rail canal barge) GHG emission reduction

obligation

22

24 Green Port Indicators Research

As the previous section list shown Green Port measures and programs are

substantially the same

When a ship entry in the port boundary from voyage many ports give a

incentive on shifting and utilizing sulfur-low fuel and reducing the speed under

20 miles when the ship berth in the port the alternative maritime power are

provided which replace its power generation

Next in the cargo unloading and loading department the same with above

utilization of sulfur-low fuel and electrical equipment are promoted and

eco-driving education to driver is necessary what speed is fuel fully burning and

emission minimum point

In the cargo transport department in other words truck department the

replacement on aging trucks is popular in many ports aging trucks are prohibited

close to port at the same time an incentive or support function are provided on

aging replacement The automated equipments are recommended to utilize in the

Green Port like hybrid yard tractor And a perfect plan on truck running also could

reduce the idling time and against the emission of CO2

The details reference the following Table 241

23

Table241 Green Port measures in port each department

Emission reduction programs

Ship

department

Shipping

in the

port

boundary

Obligation on the utilization of sulfur-low fuel

Reform ship engine and utilize hybrid

Speed reduce in the port entrance(a off-shore fee

incentive)

Off-shore AMP

Shift utilization system of clean fuel

Unloading and loading

department

Obligation on the utilization of sulfur-low fuel

Replace electrical equipment

Eco-driving

Truck department Hybrid yard tractor utilization

Promote aging truck replacement

Minimum the idling time

Others LED light in the Port

Develop renew and recycle resource energy

The Green Port measures in this study are e-RTGC AMP AGV Green Ship

certification system incentives on the new clean technology Green Flag(speed

reduction incentive)eco-friendly transport means conversion joint distribution

the cost on account of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction polities and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

The details and definition on each Green Port measure and the relationship with

Port Competitiveness will be expressed in next chapter

24

Chapter 3 The Relationship between Port

Competitiveness and Green Port Construction

31 Port Competitiveness Literature Review

Although past studies on port selection models have focused on port selection

made by port facilities port services port rates and charge and location

Murphy made a survey between 534 shipping companies and port authorities in

1989 and between 1850 shipping companies and port authorities in 1992

Comparing with other papers Murphys got a survey among more widely

objects In his paper port selection(port competitiveness) was seen to affected by

facilities situation appropriate pilotage max ship entrance probability the

25

capability of handling non-regular cargos whether to provide information of ship

nationality or not and port services level

In French model (1979) there are two factors affecting the port selection (port

competitiveness) endogenous factor and exogenous factor In endogenous factors

there are adequacy and physical plant condition of terminal facilities terminal rate

and charges frequency and geographic coverage of ship and freight services the

capacity of connecting to inland rails or transport net and the services provides for

the shipping or logistics And exogenous factors included the size and economic

capacity of hinterland as a source exports or market for imports national

economic situation trade policy and support established by government the

situation at home and abroad

The same as Frenchs paper in Paters paper in 1990 there are endogenous and

exogenous factors too In endogenous there are the services provides for the

shipping or logistics capacity of terminal facilities situation and condition of

facilities operation strategies established by port authority convenience to utilize

And the political situation at home and abroad social change economic factor

stabilized labor and capital However in 2004 there is a tremendous change in

Peters new paper There are four parts multi-modal process interface transport

modes infrastructure Multi-model Process part includes ship entrance rapid

speed and accuracy shipper and shipping companies reactive operation flexibility

Interface includes labor power information technology and so on And there are

26

ship calls frequency and amount of fleet factors in the transport modes part In the

infrastructure part includes port facility equipments and so on

Port facilities rates and charges services inland situation and social

circumstance factors affect the port selection and competitiveness a lot from the

research until 1992 by Murphy And in Lirn and Pater research 2003-2004 the

new and detail factors are shown to us

We can clearly see the contents in next table

27

Table 311 Prevention literature research results

Influence factors

French

(1979)

Endogenous

port facilities port rate and charges calls frequency port services

port connection with inland

Exogenous

economic size of hinterland national economic situation trade

policy home and abroad situation

Willingale

(1982)

voyage distance economy size entrance to port and route port

facilities max ship entrance probability port operation rates and

charges port authority scale of port

Slack

(1985)

cost of inland transportation port proximity ship demurrage

multi-transport

Peter

(1990)

Endogenous

port facilities condition of facilities operation strategies

convenience to utilize

Exogenous

political situation social change economic factor stabilized labor

and capital

UNCTAD

(1992)

port facilities services location level of financial industry

information communication system social circumstances economic

stability

Murphy

(1992)

facilities situation appropriate pilotage max ship entrance

probability the capability of handling non-regular cargos whether to

provide information of ship nationality or not port services level

Lirn

(2003-2004)

physical and technologic facilities geopolitical location port

operation and management shipping and terminal cost

Peter

(2004)

Multi-modal Process

ship entrance rapid speed and accuracy shipper and shipping

companies reactive operation flexibility

Interface labor and capital

Transport modes ship calls frequency and amount of fleet factors

28

And there are many experts and scholars research for the influence factors to

port selection and competitiveness in Korea The specific content follows table5

Table 312 Literature research in Korean academia

Influence factors

Jeon Il-su (1992) location facilities charges service level (EDI) terminal operation

port authority

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

( 1993 )

location facilities throughput charges service operation

situation

Kim Hak-so

(1993)

export shipping amount of annual cost of each ton of cargo

marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km of

cargo loading time

import marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km

of cargo amount of liner ship

Yeo Gi-tae (1996) location facilities throughput charge service operation situation

Ha Dong-u amp

Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

location facilities service level logistics charges environment of

logistics service

Yeo Gi-tae (1999) location facilities throughput charges service

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

throughput quay length yard area GNP

Kum Jong-su

(2001)

distance between port and cargo site terminal facilities service

the capacity of multi-transport capacity of cargo handling

administrative service rates and charges of inland transport

congestion

Yeo Gi-tae (2002) location throughput facilities service level

Kim Jin-gu (2002) port facilities location cargo amount rates and charges services

29

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005)

voyage degree to attract cargo cargo handling cost amount of

handling cargo connection to inland service reliability location

berth availability quay length feeder network depth

transshipment volumes cargo security profitability

offing degree to attract cargo berth availability cargo handling

cost transshipment volumes

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005)

cargo handling amount port facilities location rates and charges

level of service

Heo Yun-su

(2005)

port facilities rates and charges services marketing geopolitics

location economic and social circumstance

Kim Geun-seop

(2007)

port services facilities cargo handling amount location cost

productivity factor global factor

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) rates and charges services port characteristics

Many experts and scholars make a research on port selection and

competitiveness recently But the factors selection criteria are difference

Nevertheless the main factors are facilities services cost and so on

Therefore port competitiveness factors which chose in this study are port

facilities port services port rates and charges and social circumstance

However the main factors are not the whole factors any more more and more

detail factors and characteristic factors appearance Port selection and

competitiveness factors have changed And the development content is introduced

in next part

30

32 Port Competitiveness Development Tree

As mentioned above port facilities port rates and charges and port location are

the basic factors in the port selection and competitiveness

From the following table we can discover that first one facilities rates and

charges and location are the most important factor in port selection and

competitiveness second one the importance of social circumstance turns larger

inland connection is necessary all the time

Table 321 Main factor in the Pretentious Research

31

port facilities rates and

charges

inland

connection

social

circumstance location

French (1979) radic radic radic

Wiliingale (1982) radic radic

Slack (1985) radic

Pater (1990) radic radic

UNCTAD (1992) radic radic radic

Murphy(1992) radic

Jeon Il-su (1992) radic radic radic

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

(1993)

radic radic radic

Kim Hak-so

(1993) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1996) radic radic radic

Ha Dong-u

amp Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1998) radic radic radic

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

radic

Kum Jong-su

(2001) radic radic radic radic

Kim Jin-gu(2002) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(2002) radic radic

Lirn(2003-2004) radic radic radic

Pater(2004) radic

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005) radic radic radic

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005) radic radic radic

Heo Yun-su

(2005) radic radic radic radic

Kim Geun-seop

(2007) radic radic radic radic

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) radic

32

33 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green

Port Construction

Following the research above Port facilities rates and charges inland

connection and social circumstance are chose in this study port selection and

competitiveness department

e-RTGC Electric rubber tired gantry crane is a mobile gantry crane used for

stacking intermodal containers within the stacking areas of a container terminal

e-RTGC are used at container terminals and container storage yards to straddling

multiple lanes of railroad and container storage or when maximum storage

density in the container stack is desired

AMP is shorted for Alternative Marine Power and Itrsquos a facility which

provides the electric system in the land for ship which entry in the port The

facility can reduce emissions which ship get entrance in the port

AGV is a mobile robot that follows markers or wires in the floor or uses

vision or lasers They are most often used in industrial applications to move

materials around a manufacturing facility or a warehouse Automatic Guided

Vehicle systems work around-the-clock making continuous flow and just-in-time

delivery easier to achieve Application of the automatic guided vehicle has broade

33

ned during the late 20th century and they are no longer restricted to industrial

environments

The e-RTGC AMP and AGV are the new clean facilities and equipments in the

Green Port they donrsquot reduce the efficiency of handling cargo and they also

reduce the CO2 emission account

Green ship certification system if a ship utilizes clean and CO2 emission

reduction technology on the ship building adds equipment and management and

son on certification would be received And the port authority gives some

incentive and preferential treatment among 45 ports Such as a better schedule is

provided for green membership ship priority in handing cargo and discount on

entrance fee

Incentives on the new cleaning technology There are two expressions about

this measure one is that the port authority give a incentive to ship which have a

great utilization on the new cleaning technology and the other one is that

environment provide many incentives to the authority which utilize the new

cleaning technology in the port such as LED street lamp solar power cranes

Green flag The Green Flag incentive program was set up to encourage ships to

slow down in order to improve air quality The Green Flag program provides

approximately $2 million a year in discounts for vessel operators who slow their

ships to 12 knots (22kmh) or less within 20miles (32km) of the harbor

34

According to the Port the Green Flag program reduced air pollution by 600tons in

2007 and is expected to do better in 2008

All of Green ship certification system incentives on the new cleaning

technology and Green Flag are incentives provided for users of port and aimed at

reduce port rates and charges So the 3 measures belong to affect port rates and

charges

Eco-friendly transport means conversion Eco-friendly means of transport are

much accounted of green port for example railway discharge less GHG emission

than truck barge with a clean engine among the river and inshore canal

Joint distribution joint distribution is a collaborative system which port

provides among many logistics companies It can make the cargo handling speed

rapidly and reduce cargo storage time for CO2 emission reducing such as

refrigerated container In an addition it also makes the logistics companies

transport more efficient

Cost on amount of CO2 emission differenced from other port the cost on

amount of CO2 is included in the port cost The cost aims to reduce the CO2

emission directly

CO2 emission reduction policies compared with other traditional port Green

Port gives more cost discount and incentives but in an addition there are many

policies on CO2 emission restriction Such as aging trucks restrictions in inland

transport department ship entry speed reduced and fuel changed in the ship

35

department and so on Whether these restriction policies constrain port

development or not and the degree of these policies constrain port development

will be explain by the AHP results

Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors some ports in the

western countries are opened as a travel place for visitors so as to change the

polluted impress and raise the position in our heart

Cost on amount of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction policies and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors can affect the social

circumstance factor Whether these measures can or not improve the social

circumstance and port competitiveness we have to see the next calculation and

results

36

Chapter 4 The Green Port Competitiveness

Analysis

41 The Green Port Competitiveness Model by AHP

The AHP is one multi-criteria decision making method which has been

extensively applied to a variety of decision-making situations The multi-criteria

techniques are considered to be a promising framework for evaluation of

decision-making factors since they have the potential to take into account

conflicting multidimensional incommensurable and uncertain effects of

decisions explicitly

In order to apply the AHP method a hierarchical decision schema was

constructed by decomposing the decision problem into its decision elements

37

After that the importance or preferences of the decision elements are examined in

a pair-wise comparison to the elements in the hierarchy The parameters are

estimated using pair-wise comparisons between the importance of the attribute or

decision element in the function using data made by each responder Making

comparisons is a question of which of the two attributes is more import as well as

how much more important

Follow these theories the Green Port Competitiveness Model choose factors as

follow in port competitiveness factors part there are port facilities port rates and

charges inland connection social circumstance in Green Port construction part

there are e-RTGC AMP AGV green ship certification system green flag

incentives on the new cleaning technology eco-friendly transport means

conversion joint distribution CO2 emission reduction policies cost on amount of

CO2 emission beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

38

Figure 41 Green Port Competitiveness AHP model

Follow the Green Port Competitiveness AHP as shown we set a questionnaire

survey to many experts scholars working in logistics system area And we got 15

ones and 14 ones results are believable and integrated

42 Green Port Competitiveness Analysis

39

The key to construction of the factors which affects the port competitiveness

is to determine the conceptual model The selection of the factors directly affects

the evaluation of the result In order to ensure the accuracy objectivity and

practicality of evaluation results the following basic principles must be followed

when selecting factors systematic principles the principle of universal

comparability practical principle and goal-oriented principle In view of the

foregoing the competitiveness which affected by Green Port construction model

is made The analysis follows established principles of port competitiveness

evaluation taking into account the characteristics and functions of the port as well

as port facilities port services port rates and charges ship entrance inland

connection social circumstances and so on

(1) Port facilities

e-RTGC U11 AMP U12 AGV U13

(2) Port rates and charges

Green ship certification system U21 Incentives on the new clean

technology U22 Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

(3) Inland connection

Eco-friendly means of transport U31 Joint distribution U32

(4) Social circumstances

40

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41 CO2 emission reduction policies

U42 Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors U43

Table 421 Details of Level I and Level II values

Level I

indicators Symbol Level II indicators Symbol

Port facilities A1

e-RTGC U11

AMP U12

AGV U13

Port rates and

charges A2

Green ship certification system U21

Incentives on the new clean technology U22

Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

Inland

connection A3

Eco-friendly means of transport U31

Joint distribution U32

Social

circumstances A4

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41

CO2 emissions reduction policies U42

Beautiful environment construction in inner

harbors U43

41

I Determination of level I indicator weights

As the ports competitiveness evaluation indicators at this level are complex

and the elements are not easily quantified AHP is adopted to determine the

indicator weights with the basic steps as follows

(1) Establish a comparative judgment matrix The comparative judgment

matrix is obtained through comparing contributed proportion of multiple

indicators to the overall target by the judgment scale wherein the fuzzy

judgment number introduced is 1 3 5 7 and 9 and the reciprocal of

such number indicates the important degree of one element relatively to

another The results are shown in next table

Table 422 Comparison matrix of level I indicators

A1 A2 A3 A4

A1 1 15 13 3

A2 5 1 3 7

A3 3 13 1 5

A4 13 17 15 1

(2) Calculate the characteristic vector of the comparative judgment matrix

which refers to the weighted vector of the indicator The writer adopts

42

the geometric method to calculate the characteristic vector The

calculated result is as follows

ω=(012 0560 026 006)T λmax=418 It can be obtained from the table

RI=09 Wherein ω is the characteristic vector corresponding to the

maximum characteristic value λmax of the comparative judgment matrix

namely the weighted vector of the indicator RI is the average

consistency indicator as shown in following table

Table423 Average random consistency indicator RI

Matrix Order

RI

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

0 0 058 09 112 124 132 141

Matrix Order

RI

9 10 11 12 13 14 15

145 149 152 154 156 158 159

(3) Conduct consistency check on the comparative judgment matrix Adopt

the random consistency proportion CR to judge the consistency of the

comparative judgment matrix According to CI= (λmax -n)(n-1) and

CR=CIRI it can be obtained through calculation CR=007lt01 Thus

this comparative judgment matrix has a satisfactory consistency and the

indicator weight coefficient calculated through this matrix is acceptable

43

II Determination of level II indicator weights

The data at this level are the details of level Ⅰ indicator The judgment

matrix obtained through comparing multiple sub-indicators under Level Ⅰ

indicators is adopted to determine the weights of sub-indicators under each

indicator one by one The specific steps are as follows

(1) The experts score the weights within the given range To determine the

weights of several small indicators under the same big indicator it is

supposed that the score of small indicator ｋ under the indicator j made

by the expert i is Xijk wherein i=12n n is the total number of

experts ј=12m m is the total number of LevelⅡ indicator к

=12Oj Oj is the number of small indicators under the big indicator ј

іјк IJK LRC l I j k

(2) The credit rating of the expert і is l l =1 2 3 l =1 indicates this expert

is quite familiar with the evaluated contents l =2 indicator this expert is

44

with the evaluated contents l =3 indicates this expert is not quite familiar

with the evaluated contents yi1 is the=08 yi2 =05 and yi3=1

(3) The comprehensive evaluation score of small indicator l under the

indicator j is as follows

(4) The formula for normalization processing of indicator weights is as

follows and the absolute weight of the indicator set is marked as

q=(q1q2q11)

(5) Because of the same justification and principle we donrsquot give the detail

about the calculation The same with the level Ⅰ calculation we

manipulation data one by one and get 14 results And obtain the average

45

results by weighted average method The results detail as Table for the

final weights of Level-Ⅱ evaluation indicators

Above the calculation process and method are just one of data from the

questionable surveys In this study the final results are got from the

weighted average by the results of each questionable survey

The final results are shown as Table424

Table424 Indicator weights table of indicator system

Level I

indicators Weight LevelⅡ indicators

Relative

weight

Absolute

weight

Importance

percentage

Port Facilities

A1 02735

e-RTGC U11 05506 01506 1506

AMP U12 01648 00451 451

AGV U13 02826 00773 773

Port Rates and

Charges A2

02902

Green ship certification s

ystem U21 04724 01371 1371

Incentives on the new

clean technology U22 02871 00833 833

Green Flag (speed

reduction incentive)U23 02405 00698 698

Inland

connection A3

02865

Eco-friendly means of

transport U31 05942 01702 1702

Joint distribution U32 04058 01163 1163

Social

environmentA4 00863

Cost on amount of CO2

emission U41 03698 00319 319

CO2 emissions reduction

policies U42 02273 00196 196

Beautiful environment

construction in inner

harbors U43

04029 00348 348

46

III Case study

In the questionable survey we also got the mark of Green Port measures

evaluation value of many main ports such as Singapore Port Shanghai Port

Hongkong Port Busan Port LALB Port Rotterdam Port and Yocohama Port

The highest mark is 5 and lowest one is 1

Table425 Evaluation value of many main ports

Singapore

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

LALB

Port

Rotterdam

Port

Yocohama

Port

Port facilities 38000 36000 34000 38182 38000 42000 32000

Port rates and

charges 32000 36000 31000 35455 32000 39000 33000

Inland

connection 39000 34545 35000 29091 35000 45000 36000

Social

circumstance 42000 32727 41000 32000 38000 42727 36000

With the Green Port and Port competitiveness indicator weights results these

ports got the final evaluation value

47

Table426 Final evaluation value on main ports Green Port measures and

competitiveness

Rotterdam

Port

Singapore

Port

LALB

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

Yocohama

Port

394 345 330 330 319 318 317

43 Results Analysis

From the results table we can obtain the many results as following

① The main Green Port measures which are more important to improve port

competitiveness are Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system the indicator weights are 01702 01506 and

01371 among the 11 indicators

② In the Green Port construction Cost on amount of CO2 emission and CO2

emissions reduction policies are the restrictions indicators but the weight

of two indicators are not big 00319 and 00196 So effect on Green Port

construction to port competitiveness does have the weaken capacity but

not clearly strengthen more clearly Thus Green Port construction really

could improve the port competitiveness

48

③ In the case study traditional ports Rotterdam and Singapore Port give us

better examples on Green Port construction especially Rotterdam Port

④ Hongkong Busan and Yocohama Port all got a lower evaluation value

But in detail Hongkong and Yocohama Port got a lower on the port

facilities and rates and charges Busan Port got a higher on the port

facilities and rates and charges but a lower on the inland connection and

social circumstance

⑤ Shanghai Port doesnrsquot have Particular strength factors but the

comprehensive strength is not bad the same as LALB Port

49

Chapter 5 Conclusion

In this thesis the effects of Green Port construction for improving the port

competitiveness have been studied Under the definition of Green Port the

characteristics of Green Port and its effects has been shown by analysing the AHP

method which based on the questionary survey for Green Port specialists and port

officers

Follow the results of analysis on Green Port competitiveness AHP model

Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green ship certification system is

better for Green Port Construction welcome for shipping companies and citizens

who live around the port And in the analysis of Port competitiveness factors port

rates and charges always affects port competitiveness a lot As a trend inland

connection factor abstracts more attention of shipping companies

50

On the trend of port department each port should take a activity to adjust

strategy for improving its competitiveness Such as in the main ports evaluation

Busan port get a high value on port rates and charges and port facilities but as a

lower value on inland connection factor the final value is not as well as we look

forward In the evaluation of Singapore Port through it gets a lower value on rates

and charges higher value on inland connection and social circumstance causes the

final value are better So the Green Port Construction may be a trend in port

department

In the results of this thesis Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system are better solutions for Green Port Construction And

especially it can be verified that the port rates and charges always affects port

competitiveness Futhermore the investment for Green Port construction and its

effects have to be verified in the future

51

References

1 Hoyle B S and Smith J 1992 Transport and Development In Modern

transport geography edited by B S Hoyle R D Knowles (London Belhaven

Press)pp11-31

2 Beresford A K C De Souza A J R G and Pettit S J 2005 Stategic

development of liner shipping companies and terminal operators Ocean yearbook

19(Chicago 1L The University of Chicago Press) pp 732-750

3 Heaver T D 2002 Supply chain and logistics management implications for

liner shipping In The handbook of maritime economics and business edited by C

Grammenos (LondonLLP) pp 375-396

4 Park T E (2011) A Study on selection criteria of Green Port and evaluation of

major Korean port A masters thesis of graduate school of Incheon university

52

5 JeongBH (2009)Green port management policy directions in the green

growth era- The case of Gwangyang port in Republic of Korea Journal of Korea

Port Economic Association Vol25(3) p361-384

6 Lee J S Han N H(2009) A study on Green Port Revitalization According to

Air Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

7 Lee Y K Nan J W(2010)Green Logistics Policy Analysis and Implications

of Japan

8 Lee B S (2010)Tendency and Countermeasures on Green Logistics in Port

Logistics Company A masters thesis of graduate school of Korean Maritime

university

9 Lee J S (2009) A Study on Green Port Revitalization According to Air

Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

10 Zhang F Y Li Z Lu X J Yao X L(2008)Competitiveness of Inland

Ports Based on F-AHP

11 Port of Long Beach (2009) Green Port Policy wwwpolbcom

12 The port of Los Angeles wwwportoflosangelesorg

7

was adopted in Kyoto Japan on 11 December 1997 and entered into force on 16

February 2005 The detailed rules for the implementation of the Protocol were

adopted at COP 7 in Marrakesh in 2001 and are called the ldquoMarrakesh Accordsrdquo

Follow the ltKyoto Protocolgt several flexible mechanisms are allowed Such

as emissions trading the clean development mechanism (CDM) and joint

implementation The mechanisms allow AnnexⅠcounties to meet their GHG

emission limitations by purchasing GHG emission reductions credits from

elsewhere through financial exchanges projects that reduce emissions in

non-Annex Ⅰ countries or Annex Ⅰ countries with excess allowances The

mechanisms help stimulate green investment and help Parties meet their emission

targets in a cost-effective way

Therefore many countries take action on reducing the GHG discharge emission

For example increase the energy utilization efficiency develop the solar power

wind energy tidal energy and other clean energy in their industry The details

about objective of GHG emission reduction in main countries are displayed as the

following ltTable 1gt

8

ltTable 1gt Objective of CO2 reduce in main countries

Bench

mark of

Year

Objective

()

Absolute

quantity

()

Remark

EU 1990 20~30 -20~-30 Norway New Zealand 40 reducing

USA 2005 17 -3 Passed by House of Representatives

Japan 1990 25 -25 On the premise of attention with China

India

Korea 2020

(BAU) 30 mdashmdash

Discharge amount is up to 564million don

in estimation

China 2005 40~50 60~150

(2005) Each GDP

India 2005 20-25 mdashmdash With the developed countries

participation

Russia 1990 25 -25 Be neutral country

Norway 1990 30~40 -30~-40 mdashmdash

New

Zealand 1990 10~20 -10~ -20 mdashmdash

Austria 2000 5~25 -3~-11 mdashmdash

Canada 2003 20 -3 mdashmdash

Mexico 2002 50 mdashmdash With the developed countries

participation

South

Africa

2020

(BAU) 34 mdashmdash

With the developed countries

participation

Brazil 2020

(BAU) 36~39

-20

(2005) mdashmdash

(Korean Maritime Institute 20095)

9

22 The Definition of Green Port

As the global warming affecting in the world climate has been heavily changed

natural disaster frequently occurred natural resources depletion and supply

imbalance cause crisis to reach a high level For the purpose of getting away from

financial crisis and creating the new growth motivity the counties in the world

make more efforts on developing economic

Because of the realization of this global climate and environment crisis Korean

government had brought out the ldquoGreen Growth Policyrdquo And it made the ldquoGreen

Growth Policyrdquo be embodied and law-governed announced ldquoLow Carbon Green

Growth of the Basic Lawrdquo

In order to coordinate with this policy and law build up the ldquoGreen Growthrdquo

everyone make their efforts and reach ldquoGreen Growthrdquo in Korea each department

As a important industry department port authority also take activity to match the

national strategy of ldquoGreen Growthrdquo and draw up the plan on ldquoGreen Portrdquo

construction

However there isnrsquot a clear definition about the Green Port Korean Land

Transport and Maritime Ministry have explained the Green Port as follows Green

house gas Reducing Energy Effciencing Nature-friendly Port The explanation is

very easy to understand but from a professional point of view it not very

10

comprehensive and concrete So we have to understand the concept in the Green

Port Construction measures and programs There are about 4 kind explanation and

promotion programs in the Green Port Respectively the port which based on

green technology and green business creating new growth motive improving

living standards jumping in the ranks of the advanced port

ltFigure 2gt Green Port appearance and basic definition

In the Green Growth National Strategy Policy there are 10 pieces of policy

directions and 50 researches each department should choose the appropriate one

Follow these researches chose by port availability especially Low Carbon

11

Self-sufficiency Port The Disaster Safety Port Eco-friendly Port Resource

Recycling Port and in this study Green Port construction is a plan on

comprehensive and mix of 4kinds of Green Port Construction

Table 221 Four Promotions for Green Port Construction

Promotion Program

(Green Port type) Activities

Low-Carbon

Self-Sufficiency Port

Eco-friendly inland transportation system building

New renewable resources power equipment utilization

AMP LED utilization

The Disaster Safety

Port

Disaster Prevention environment infrastructure building

Disaster prediction and corresponding system utilization

Eco-Friendly Port Beauty the port by green park planting and so on

Provide eco-friendly port building programs

Resource Recycling

Port

Port waste (silt soil) effectively recycling system

Establish resource recycling port paragon

As table1 shown each type of Green Port has a separate emphasis

Eco-friendly inland transportation system which encourages utilizing rail canal

barge clean system reduces the truck application amount AMP means

Alternative Maritime Power supply system replaces with ship power generation

The Green Port construction in most of counties is the low-carbon self-sufficiency

12

port And in their construction maybe add a few other type promote director like

beauty the port by green park planting and so on

However in this study the Green Port concept is a comprehensive plan among

4 types not a specialization system

23 Green Port Construction Situation in major countries

After ltKyoto protocolgt having brought out each department began to take

affords on the reducing the GHG (greenhouse gas) emission In port department

the activities are embodied in the Green Port construction In this study many

major ports in US EU Japan and Korea are chose to explain for research

231 US

① LALB Port

In order to achieve to reduce marine pollutants standby and build clean port

LALB Port standby resource ministry and environment protection ministry

signed a 5year plan on clean standby action cooperation

This promotion business plan set a set of marine pollutants standby emission

limitation on the ship department from the statistics year 2006-2007 to 2010-2011

handling department heavy duty equipment truck department and so on Such as

13

in Green Port Technology construction department measures and programs are

shown in following Table

Table231 the details of LALB Port Green Port Promotion Programs

Promotion Program

Heavy Equipment Truck

Heavy Equipment

Replace and Update Aging Facilities

Substitute Fuels and Clean Fuel Incentives

Budgetary for the Development of Substitute Fuels

Marine Vessels Tugs

Ship Speed Reduction within the Port

Electrical supply of parking in the Berth

Use low-sulfur fuel (supplementary motor)

Handling Equipment

Air Quality Monitoring

Measure ambient air pollution levels in the vicinity of

the Port

Include a number of real-time air quality measurements

On the restrict situation of heavy equipment trucks and others vessels must to

be replaced and rebuilt in order to minimum the emission of NOx And the trucks

which donrsquot reach the regulate standard do not allowed to get in the port These

regulations will help their owner to replace and update trucks and also set up a

replacement plan to 16000 aging trucks make the replace done by 2012 As

foundation repaired the cargo owner must to pay an addition tax about 20ft 35$

40ft 79$

14

In the maritime department the speed reduction incentive took action in

Jan2005 When ship entry into the port boundary speed must be reduced under

20 miles 12kont At the beginning the effect of this plan is very clearly so the

limitation may be raised to 40mile And AMP (Alternative Maritime Power ) is

encouraged to be built and developed as to ship use their engine and get GHG

emission

② New York- New Jersey Port

The New York- New Jersey Port Authority brought out environment policy on

CO2 emission reduction The main concepts as following first reduce PX SOX

3 each year and CO2 5 Second ship must utilize sulfur-low fuel as a

obligation Third AMP is provided Forth modern the unloading and loading

equipment must be built Fifth promote trucks replacement Sixth reform the ship

engine Seventh invent 9 billion dollars in the following 10 years Eighth invent

to all hybrid equipment (325) Ninth install the hybrid truck in AMPT and

NYCT

③ Seattle Port

15

In Seattle Port Air Environment Maritime Improvement plan has been

accepted in 2005 The plan includes first set up Puget Sound Maritime Air

Forum and make one AMP provide services for two tour ships second change

the diesel hybrid equipment into electric utilization Third use bio-diesel and

diesel catalyst and reduce the emission Forth emphasize the standard and plan of

truck minimum the idling time

Seattle Port Tacoma Port and Vancouver made a assignment and promote

ldquoNorthwest Ports Clean Air Strategyrdquo

④ Auckland Port

Auckland Port set up the aging replacement plan in 2008 and invent 20 milion

dollars gas emission should reach the level And cargo transport system in port

hinterland port authority and Air environment management committee make

cooperation and give an incentive to truck which use new clean technology

Table232 Short term and Long term Green Port Plans in Auckland Port

16

17

232 EU

Rotterdam Port

As the biggest Port in EU Rotterdam Port takes more affords in reducing the

CO2 emission Main programs are low carbon footprint AMP and so on The

limitation of CO2 emission reduces down 50 of 1990 by 2025

In July 2008 the authority of Rotterdam port gave international cooperation

with other ports an extra boost by organizing the World Ports Climate Conference

During this conference the authority of Rotterdam discussed possible ways in

which ports and business could reduce air pollution and CO2 emissions The

proposals the authority of Rotterdam was set out in a declaration which was

supported by all 55 port cities attending the conference The conference resulted

in five projects to improve air quality and reduce CO2 emissions The authority of

Rotterdam is behind the project to further elaborate an Environmental Ship Index

The Rotterdam Climate Initiative is a joint venture with the municipality of

Rotterdam DCMR Environmental Protection Agency Rijnmond and Deltalinqs

Common goal is to halve CO2 emissions in the region by 2025 in comparison with

1990 levels In connection with the Rotterdam Climate Initiative the port works

on (together with DCMR and others) creating an infrastructure for the capture

18

transport and storage of CO2 A business case presented in the summer of 2008 is

now being elaborated into a business plan The business case concludes that

Rotterdam can begin in 2015 with the capture transport and underground storage

of five million tons of CO2 per annum This means that the basic infrastructure

will then be in place for further growth in capture and storage to twenty million

tons in 2025

In 2008 a start was made on the development of a sustainability index for

activities relating to the P for Planet (environment) In 2009 it will further expand

the index to cover the P for People and the P for Profit In the first phase of the

sustainability index CO2 footprint sustainable purchasing sustainable building

and sustainable land allocation will be covered

233 Japan

① Tacoma Port

In the Tacoma Port there are some programs on protecting the air water and

soil environment

In the air protection department ldquoNorthwest Ports Clean Air Strategyrdquo

ldquoGreen Gateway for Traderdquo and ldquoTruck Programrdquo had brought out to against air

pollution The concepts include using ultra-low sulfur diesel bio-diesel and other

cleaner-burning fuels in cargo-handling equipment using low-sulfur distillate

19

fuels at berth adding ldquogreen designrdquo environmental features to ships including

diesel-electric motors that save up to 30 percent in fuel and significantly reduce

emissions setting targets to change older less-efficient truck engines installing

anti-idling devices on rail-switching engines as well as partnering on other

innovative technological advance

The Port of Tacomarsquos four dockside rail yards move cargo quickly and

efficiently from container terminals They also reduce the number of trucks on

city streets and highways Each full train that leaves the Port represents 250 to 300

trucks not on our roads reducing roadway congestion and diesel emissions The

lowest emission route to ship cargo from Asia to the US Midwest is through the

Puget Sound according to the results of a study by Herbert Engineering released

in May 2009

And in the land protection program there are successful clean projects open

spaces and future habitat restoration In 2007 the Port purchased about 70 acres

of open space known as Juliarsquos Gulch and Storey Pit located between the

Tideflats and residential Northeast Tacoma Monitor water quality system is in

utilization in the water department in Tacoma Port

② Tokyo Port

In the Tokyo Port Green Port programs are almost similar with Tacoma Port

e-RTGC (Rubber Tired Gantry Crane) the barge between Tokyo and Yocohama

20

which shorten international maritime container cargo transportation land distance

super eco-shipbuilding technology dissemination and promotion green business

certification operation and shippers and logistics companies support cooperation

③ Osaka Port and Hakata Port

AMP electrical power equipment and solar power equipment are in utilization in

Osaka Port E-RTGC and solar power of refrigerated container are in utilization in

the Hakata Port

234 Korea

In Busan Port a set of Green Port took implementation such as LNG truck

E-RTGC equipment utilization eco-friendly transport means conversion (rail

canal barge) and GHG emission reduction obligation Table233

21

ltTable 233gt Summary of the Main Port of Green Port Measures

COUNTRY PORT MEASURES

US

LALB Port

Green flag AMP discharge gas reduction obligation

recommends use of alternative fuels and clean fuel

funding for the development of alternative fuels facilities

by new engine development instead of NOx emissions

green truck program (reduce70-80) low-sulfur fuel

utilization restore and revitalize the Los Cerritos

Wetlands

New York

Port

AMP modernized facilities utilization high speed hybrid

yard

Auckland

Port

Incentives on the new cleaning technology containers

transportation system

Seattle Port

AMP green ship membership Tier 4 level reducing PM

by 1994 level Smart Way program Northwest Ports

Clean Air Strategy

EU Rotterdam

Port

Clean engine (barge) green ship membership carbon

footprint calculation cruise ship which under port

authority change to use low-sulfur fuel low emission

engine development and utilization Green Award AMP

ship recycling incentives

Japan

Tokyo Port

RTGC (Rubber Tired Gantry Crane) apply for the barge

between Tokyo and Yocohama shorten international

maritime container cargo transportation land distance

super eco-shipbuilding technology dissemination and

promotion green business certification operation

shippers and logistics companies support cooperation

Osaka Port AMP electrical power equipment solar power equipment

Hakata Port E-RTGC solar power utilization in refrigerated container

Korea Busan Port

LNG truck E-RTGC eco-friendly transport means

conversion (rail canal barge) GHG emission reduction

obligation

22

24 Green Port Indicators Research

As the previous section list shown Green Port measures and programs are

substantially the same

When a ship entry in the port boundary from voyage many ports give a

incentive on shifting and utilizing sulfur-low fuel and reducing the speed under

20 miles when the ship berth in the port the alternative maritime power are

provided which replace its power generation

Next in the cargo unloading and loading department the same with above

utilization of sulfur-low fuel and electrical equipment are promoted and

eco-driving education to driver is necessary what speed is fuel fully burning and

emission minimum point

In the cargo transport department in other words truck department the

replacement on aging trucks is popular in many ports aging trucks are prohibited

close to port at the same time an incentive or support function are provided on

aging replacement The automated equipments are recommended to utilize in the

Green Port like hybrid yard tractor And a perfect plan on truck running also could

reduce the idling time and against the emission of CO2

The details reference the following Table 241

23

Table241 Green Port measures in port each department

Emission reduction programs

Ship

department

Shipping

in the

port

boundary

Obligation on the utilization of sulfur-low fuel

Reform ship engine and utilize hybrid

Speed reduce in the port entrance(a off-shore fee

incentive)

Off-shore AMP

Shift utilization system of clean fuel

Unloading and loading

department

Obligation on the utilization of sulfur-low fuel

Replace electrical equipment

Eco-driving

Truck department Hybrid yard tractor utilization

Promote aging truck replacement

Minimum the idling time

Others LED light in the Port

Develop renew and recycle resource energy

The Green Port measures in this study are e-RTGC AMP AGV Green Ship

certification system incentives on the new clean technology Green Flag(speed

reduction incentive)eco-friendly transport means conversion joint distribution

the cost on account of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction polities and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

The details and definition on each Green Port measure and the relationship with

Port Competitiveness will be expressed in next chapter

24

Chapter 3 The Relationship between Port

Competitiveness and Green Port Construction

31 Port Competitiveness Literature Review

Although past studies on port selection models have focused on port selection

made by port facilities port services port rates and charge and location

Murphy made a survey between 534 shipping companies and port authorities in

1989 and between 1850 shipping companies and port authorities in 1992

Comparing with other papers Murphys got a survey among more widely

objects In his paper port selection(port competitiveness) was seen to affected by

facilities situation appropriate pilotage max ship entrance probability the

25

capability of handling non-regular cargos whether to provide information of ship

nationality or not and port services level

In French model (1979) there are two factors affecting the port selection (port

competitiveness) endogenous factor and exogenous factor In endogenous factors

there are adequacy and physical plant condition of terminal facilities terminal rate

and charges frequency and geographic coverage of ship and freight services the

capacity of connecting to inland rails or transport net and the services provides for

the shipping or logistics And exogenous factors included the size and economic

capacity of hinterland as a source exports or market for imports national

economic situation trade policy and support established by government the

situation at home and abroad

The same as Frenchs paper in Paters paper in 1990 there are endogenous and

exogenous factors too In endogenous there are the services provides for the

shipping or logistics capacity of terminal facilities situation and condition of

facilities operation strategies established by port authority convenience to utilize

And the political situation at home and abroad social change economic factor

stabilized labor and capital However in 2004 there is a tremendous change in

Peters new paper There are four parts multi-modal process interface transport

modes infrastructure Multi-model Process part includes ship entrance rapid

speed and accuracy shipper and shipping companies reactive operation flexibility

Interface includes labor power information technology and so on And there are

26

ship calls frequency and amount of fleet factors in the transport modes part In the

infrastructure part includes port facility equipments and so on

Port facilities rates and charges services inland situation and social

circumstance factors affect the port selection and competitiveness a lot from the

research until 1992 by Murphy And in Lirn and Pater research 2003-2004 the

new and detail factors are shown to us

We can clearly see the contents in next table

27

Table 311 Prevention literature research results

Influence factors

French

(1979)

Endogenous

port facilities port rate and charges calls frequency port services

port connection with inland

Exogenous

economic size of hinterland national economic situation trade

policy home and abroad situation

Willingale

(1982)

voyage distance economy size entrance to port and route port

facilities max ship entrance probability port operation rates and

charges port authority scale of port

Slack

(1985)

cost of inland transportation port proximity ship demurrage

multi-transport

Peter

(1990)

Endogenous

port facilities condition of facilities operation strategies

convenience to utilize

Exogenous

political situation social change economic factor stabilized labor

and capital

UNCTAD

(1992)

port facilities services location level of financial industry

information communication system social circumstances economic

stability

Murphy

(1992)

facilities situation appropriate pilotage max ship entrance

probability the capability of handling non-regular cargos whether to

provide information of ship nationality or not port services level

Lirn

(2003-2004)

physical and technologic facilities geopolitical location port

operation and management shipping and terminal cost

Peter

(2004)

Multi-modal Process

ship entrance rapid speed and accuracy shipper and shipping

companies reactive operation flexibility

Interface labor and capital

Transport modes ship calls frequency and amount of fleet factors

28

And there are many experts and scholars research for the influence factors to

port selection and competitiveness in Korea The specific content follows table5

Table 312 Literature research in Korean academia

Influence factors

Jeon Il-su (1992) location facilities charges service level (EDI) terminal operation

port authority

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

( 1993 )

location facilities throughput charges service operation

situation

Kim Hak-so

(1993)

export shipping amount of annual cost of each ton of cargo

marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km of

cargo loading time

import marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km

of cargo amount of liner ship

Yeo Gi-tae (1996) location facilities throughput charge service operation situation

Ha Dong-u amp

Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

location facilities service level logistics charges environment of

logistics service

Yeo Gi-tae (1999) location facilities throughput charges service

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

throughput quay length yard area GNP

Kum Jong-su

(2001)

distance between port and cargo site terminal facilities service

the capacity of multi-transport capacity of cargo handling

administrative service rates and charges of inland transport

congestion

Yeo Gi-tae (2002) location throughput facilities service level

Kim Jin-gu (2002) port facilities location cargo amount rates and charges services

29

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005)

voyage degree to attract cargo cargo handling cost amount of

handling cargo connection to inland service reliability location

berth availability quay length feeder network depth

transshipment volumes cargo security profitability

offing degree to attract cargo berth availability cargo handling

cost transshipment volumes

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005)

cargo handling amount port facilities location rates and charges

level of service

Heo Yun-su

(2005)

port facilities rates and charges services marketing geopolitics

location economic and social circumstance

Kim Geun-seop

(2007)

port services facilities cargo handling amount location cost

productivity factor global factor

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) rates and charges services port characteristics

Many experts and scholars make a research on port selection and

competitiveness recently But the factors selection criteria are difference

Nevertheless the main factors are facilities services cost and so on

Therefore port competitiveness factors which chose in this study are port

facilities port services port rates and charges and social circumstance

However the main factors are not the whole factors any more more and more

detail factors and characteristic factors appearance Port selection and

competitiveness factors have changed And the development content is introduced

in next part

30

32 Port Competitiveness Development Tree

As mentioned above port facilities port rates and charges and port location are

the basic factors in the port selection and competitiveness

From the following table we can discover that first one facilities rates and

charges and location are the most important factor in port selection and

competitiveness second one the importance of social circumstance turns larger

inland connection is necessary all the time

Table 321 Main factor in the Pretentious Research

31

port facilities rates and

charges

inland

connection

social

circumstance location

French (1979) radic radic radic

Wiliingale (1982) radic radic

Slack (1985) radic

Pater (1990) radic radic

UNCTAD (1992) radic radic radic

Murphy(1992) radic

Jeon Il-su (1992) radic radic radic

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

(1993)

radic radic radic

Kim Hak-so

(1993) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1996) radic radic radic

Ha Dong-u

amp Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1998) radic radic radic

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

radic

Kum Jong-su

(2001) radic radic radic radic

Kim Jin-gu(2002) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(2002) radic radic

Lirn(2003-2004) radic radic radic

Pater(2004) radic

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005) radic radic radic

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005) radic radic radic

Heo Yun-su

(2005) radic radic radic radic

Kim Geun-seop

(2007) radic radic radic radic

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) radic

32

33 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green

Port Construction

Following the research above Port facilities rates and charges inland

connection and social circumstance are chose in this study port selection and

competitiveness department

e-RTGC Electric rubber tired gantry crane is a mobile gantry crane used for

stacking intermodal containers within the stacking areas of a container terminal

e-RTGC are used at container terminals and container storage yards to straddling

multiple lanes of railroad and container storage or when maximum storage

density in the container stack is desired

AMP is shorted for Alternative Marine Power and Itrsquos a facility which

provides the electric system in the land for ship which entry in the port The

facility can reduce emissions which ship get entrance in the port

AGV is a mobile robot that follows markers or wires in the floor or uses

vision or lasers They are most often used in industrial applications to move

materials around a manufacturing facility or a warehouse Automatic Guided

Vehicle systems work around-the-clock making continuous flow and just-in-time

delivery easier to achieve Application of the automatic guided vehicle has broade

33

ned during the late 20th century and they are no longer restricted to industrial

environments

The e-RTGC AMP and AGV are the new clean facilities and equipments in the

Green Port they donrsquot reduce the efficiency of handling cargo and they also

reduce the CO2 emission account

Green ship certification system if a ship utilizes clean and CO2 emission

reduction technology on the ship building adds equipment and management and

son on certification would be received And the port authority gives some

incentive and preferential treatment among 45 ports Such as a better schedule is

provided for green membership ship priority in handing cargo and discount on

entrance fee

Incentives on the new cleaning technology There are two expressions about

this measure one is that the port authority give a incentive to ship which have a

great utilization on the new cleaning technology and the other one is that

environment provide many incentives to the authority which utilize the new

cleaning technology in the port such as LED street lamp solar power cranes

Green flag The Green Flag incentive program was set up to encourage ships to

slow down in order to improve air quality The Green Flag program provides

approximately $2 million a year in discounts for vessel operators who slow their

ships to 12 knots (22kmh) or less within 20miles (32km) of the harbor

34

According to the Port the Green Flag program reduced air pollution by 600tons in

2007 and is expected to do better in 2008

All of Green ship certification system incentives on the new cleaning

technology and Green Flag are incentives provided for users of port and aimed at

reduce port rates and charges So the 3 measures belong to affect port rates and

charges

Eco-friendly transport means conversion Eco-friendly means of transport are

much accounted of green port for example railway discharge less GHG emission

than truck barge with a clean engine among the river and inshore canal

Joint distribution joint distribution is a collaborative system which port

provides among many logistics companies It can make the cargo handling speed

rapidly and reduce cargo storage time for CO2 emission reducing such as

refrigerated container In an addition it also makes the logistics companies

transport more efficient

Cost on amount of CO2 emission differenced from other port the cost on

amount of CO2 is included in the port cost The cost aims to reduce the CO2

emission directly

CO2 emission reduction policies compared with other traditional port Green

Port gives more cost discount and incentives but in an addition there are many

policies on CO2 emission restriction Such as aging trucks restrictions in inland

transport department ship entry speed reduced and fuel changed in the ship

35

department and so on Whether these restriction policies constrain port

development or not and the degree of these policies constrain port development

will be explain by the AHP results

Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors some ports in the

western countries are opened as a travel place for visitors so as to change the

polluted impress and raise the position in our heart

Cost on amount of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction policies and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors can affect the social

circumstance factor Whether these measures can or not improve the social

circumstance and port competitiveness we have to see the next calculation and

results

36

Chapter 4 The Green Port Competitiveness

Analysis

41 The Green Port Competitiveness Model by AHP

The AHP is one multi-criteria decision making method which has been

extensively applied to a variety of decision-making situations The multi-criteria

techniques are considered to be a promising framework for evaluation of

decision-making factors since they have the potential to take into account

conflicting multidimensional incommensurable and uncertain effects of

decisions explicitly

In order to apply the AHP method a hierarchical decision schema was

constructed by decomposing the decision problem into its decision elements

37

After that the importance or preferences of the decision elements are examined in

a pair-wise comparison to the elements in the hierarchy The parameters are

estimated using pair-wise comparisons between the importance of the attribute or

decision element in the function using data made by each responder Making

comparisons is a question of which of the two attributes is more import as well as

how much more important

Follow these theories the Green Port Competitiveness Model choose factors as

follow in port competitiveness factors part there are port facilities port rates and

charges inland connection social circumstance in Green Port construction part

there are e-RTGC AMP AGV green ship certification system green flag

incentives on the new cleaning technology eco-friendly transport means

conversion joint distribution CO2 emission reduction policies cost on amount of

CO2 emission beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

38

Figure 41 Green Port Competitiveness AHP model

Follow the Green Port Competitiveness AHP as shown we set a questionnaire

survey to many experts scholars working in logistics system area And we got 15

ones and 14 ones results are believable and integrated

42 Green Port Competitiveness Analysis

39

The key to construction of the factors which affects the port competitiveness

is to determine the conceptual model The selection of the factors directly affects

the evaluation of the result In order to ensure the accuracy objectivity and

practicality of evaluation results the following basic principles must be followed

when selecting factors systematic principles the principle of universal

comparability practical principle and goal-oriented principle In view of the

foregoing the competitiveness which affected by Green Port construction model

is made The analysis follows established principles of port competitiveness

evaluation taking into account the characteristics and functions of the port as well

as port facilities port services port rates and charges ship entrance inland

connection social circumstances and so on

(1) Port facilities

e-RTGC U11 AMP U12 AGV U13

(2) Port rates and charges

Green ship certification system U21 Incentives on the new clean

technology U22 Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

(3) Inland connection

Eco-friendly means of transport U31 Joint distribution U32

(4) Social circumstances

40

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41 CO2 emission reduction policies

U42 Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors U43

Table 421 Details of Level I and Level II values

Level I

indicators Symbol Level II indicators Symbol

Port facilities A1

e-RTGC U11

AMP U12

AGV U13

Port rates and

charges A2

Green ship certification system U21

Incentives on the new clean technology U22

Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

Inland

connection A3

Eco-friendly means of transport U31

Joint distribution U32

Social

circumstances A4

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41

CO2 emissions reduction policies U42

Beautiful environment construction in inner

harbors U43

41

I Determination of level I indicator weights

As the ports competitiveness evaluation indicators at this level are complex

and the elements are not easily quantified AHP is adopted to determine the

indicator weights with the basic steps as follows

(1) Establish a comparative judgment matrix The comparative judgment

matrix is obtained through comparing contributed proportion of multiple

indicators to the overall target by the judgment scale wherein the fuzzy

judgment number introduced is 1 3 5 7 and 9 and the reciprocal of

such number indicates the important degree of one element relatively to

another The results are shown in next table

Table 422 Comparison matrix of level I indicators

A1 A2 A3 A4

A1 1 15 13 3

A2 5 1 3 7

A3 3 13 1 5

A4 13 17 15 1

(2) Calculate the characteristic vector of the comparative judgment matrix

which refers to the weighted vector of the indicator The writer adopts

42

the geometric method to calculate the characteristic vector The

calculated result is as follows

ω=(012 0560 026 006)T λmax=418 It can be obtained from the table

RI=09 Wherein ω is the characteristic vector corresponding to the

maximum characteristic value λmax of the comparative judgment matrix

namely the weighted vector of the indicator RI is the average

consistency indicator as shown in following table

Table423 Average random consistency indicator RI

Matrix Order

RI

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

0 0 058 09 112 124 132 141

Matrix Order

RI

9 10 11 12 13 14 15

145 149 152 154 156 158 159

(3) Conduct consistency check on the comparative judgment matrix Adopt

the random consistency proportion CR to judge the consistency of the

comparative judgment matrix According to CI= (λmax -n)(n-1) and

CR=CIRI it can be obtained through calculation CR=007lt01 Thus

this comparative judgment matrix has a satisfactory consistency and the

indicator weight coefficient calculated through this matrix is acceptable

43

II Determination of level II indicator weights

The data at this level are the details of level Ⅰ indicator The judgment

matrix obtained through comparing multiple sub-indicators under Level Ⅰ

indicators is adopted to determine the weights of sub-indicators under each

indicator one by one The specific steps are as follows

(1) The experts score the weights within the given range To determine the

weights of several small indicators under the same big indicator it is

supposed that the score of small indicator ｋ under the indicator j made

by the expert i is Xijk wherein i=12n n is the total number of

experts ј=12m m is the total number of LevelⅡ indicator к

=12Oj Oj is the number of small indicators under the big indicator ј

іјк IJK LRC l I j k

(2) The credit rating of the expert і is l l =1 2 3 l =1 indicates this expert

is quite familiar with the evaluated contents l =2 indicator this expert is

44

with the evaluated contents l =3 indicates this expert is not quite familiar

with the evaluated contents yi1 is the=08 yi2 =05 and yi3=1

(3) The comprehensive evaluation score of small indicator l under the

indicator j is as follows

(4) The formula for normalization processing of indicator weights is as

follows and the absolute weight of the indicator set is marked as

q=(q1q2q11)

(5) Because of the same justification and principle we donrsquot give the detail

about the calculation The same with the level Ⅰ calculation we

manipulation data one by one and get 14 results And obtain the average

45

results by weighted average method The results detail as Table for the

final weights of Level-Ⅱ evaluation indicators

Above the calculation process and method are just one of data from the

questionable surveys In this study the final results are got from the

weighted average by the results of each questionable survey

The final results are shown as Table424

Table424 Indicator weights table of indicator system

Level I

indicators Weight LevelⅡ indicators

Relative

weight

Absolute

weight

Importance

percentage

Port Facilities

A1 02735

e-RTGC U11 05506 01506 1506

AMP U12 01648 00451 451

AGV U13 02826 00773 773

Port Rates and

Charges A2

02902

Green ship certification s

ystem U21 04724 01371 1371

Incentives on the new

clean technology U22 02871 00833 833

Green Flag (speed

reduction incentive)U23 02405 00698 698

Inland

connection A3

02865

Eco-friendly means of

transport U31 05942 01702 1702

Joint distribution U32 04058 01163 1163

Social

environmentA4 00863

Cost on amount of CO2

emission U41 03698 00319 319

CO2 emissions reduction

policies U42 02273 00196 196

Beautiful environment

construction in inner

harbors U43

04029 00348 348

46

III Case study

In the questionable survey we also got the mark of Green Port measures

evaluation value of many main ports such as Singapore Port Shanghai Port

Hongkong Port Busan Port LALB Port Rotterdam Port and Yocohama Port

The highest mark is 5 and lowest one is 1

Table425 Evaluation value of many main ports

Singapore

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

LALB

Port

Rotterdam

Port

Yocohama

Port

Port facilities 38000 36000 34000 38182 38000 42000 32000

Port rates and

charges 32000 36000 31000 35455 32000 39000 33000

Inland

connection 39000 34545 35000 29091 35000 45000 36000

Social

circumstance 42000 32727 41000 32000 38000 42727 36000

With the Green Port and Port competitiveness indicator weights results these

ports got the final evaluation value

47

Table426 Final evaluation value on main ports Green Port measures and

competitiveness

Rotterdam

Port

Singapore

Port

LALB

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

Yocohama

Port

394 345 330 330 319 318 317

43 Results Analysis

From the results table we can obtain the many results as following

① The main Green Port measures which are more important to improve port

competitiveness are Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system the indicator weights are 01702 01506 and

01371 among the 11 indicators

② In the Green Port construction Cost on amount of CO2 emission and CO2

emissions reduction policies are the restrictions indicators but the weight

of two indicators are not big 00319 and 00196 So effect on Green Port

construction to port competitiveness does have the weaken capacity but

not clearly strengthen more clearly Thus Green Port construction really

could improve the port competitiveness

48

③ In the case study traditional ports Rotterdam and Singapore Port give us

better examples on Green Port construction especially Rotterdam Port

④ Hongkong Busan and Yocohama Port all got a lower evaluation value

But in detail Hongkong and Yocohama Port got a lower on the port

facilities and rates and charges Busan Port got a higher on the port

facilities and rates and charges but a lower on the inland connection and

social circumstance

⑤ Shanghai Port doesnrsquot have Particular strength factors but the

comprehensive strength is not bad the same as LALB Port

49

Chapter 5 Conclusion

In this thesis the effects of Green Port construction for improving the port

competitiveness have been studied Under the definition of Green Port the

characteristics of Green Port and its effects has been shown by analysing the AHP

method which based on the questionary survey for Green Port specialists and port

officers

Follow the results of analysis on Green Port competitiveness AHP model

Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green ship certification system is

better for Green Port Construction welcome for shipping companies and citizens

who live around the port And in the analysis of Port competitiveness factors port

rates and charges always affects port competitiveness a lot As a trend inland

connection factor abstracts more attention of shipping companies

50

On the trend of port department each port should take a activity to adjust

strategy for improving its competitiveness Such as in the main ports evaluation

Busan port get a high value on port rates and charges and port facilities but as a

lower value on inland connection factor the final value is not as well as we look

forward In the evaluation of Singapore Port through it gets a lower value on rates

and charges higher value on inland connection and social circumstance causes the

final value are better So the Green Port Construction may be a trend in port

department

In the results of this thesis Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system are better solutions for Green Port Construction And

especially it can be verified that the port rates and charges always affects port

competitiveness Futhermore the investment for Green Port construction and its

effects have to be verified in the future

51

References

1 Hoyle B S and Smith J 1992 Transport and Development In Modern

transport geography edited by B S Hoyle R D Knowles (London Belhaven

Press)pp11-31

2 Beresford A K C De Souza A J R G and Pettit S J 2005 Stategic

development of liner shipping companies and terminal operators Ocean yearbook

19(Chicago 1L The University of Chicago Press) pp 732-750

3 Heaver T D 2002 Supply chain and logistics management implications for

liner shipping In The handbook of maritime economics and business edited by C

Grammenos (LondonLLP) pp 375-396

4 Park T E (2011) A Study on selection criteria of Green Port and evaluation of

major Korean port A masters thesis of graduate school of Incheon university

52

5 JeongBH (2009)Green port management policy directions in the green

growth era- The case of Gwangyang port in Republic of Korea Journal of Korea

Port Economic Association Vol25(3) p361-384

6 Lee J S Han N H(2009) A study on Green Port Revitalization According to

Air Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

7 Lee Y K Nan J W(2010)Green Logistics Policy Analysis and Implications

of Japan

8 Lee B S (2010)Tendency and Countermeasures on Green Logistics in Port

Logistics Company A masters thesis of graduate school of Korean Maritime

university

9 Lee J S (2009) A Study on Green Port Revitalization According to Air

Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

10 Zhang F Y Li Z Lu X J Yao X L(2008)Competitiveness of Inland

Ports Based on F-AHP

11 Port of Long Beach (2009) Green Port Policy wwwpolbcom

12 The port of Los Angeles wwwportoflosangelesorg

8

ltTable 1gt Objective of CO2 reduce in main countries

Bench

mark of

Year

Objective

()

Absolute

quantity

()

Remark

EU 1990 20~30 -20~-30 Norway New Zealand 40 reducing

USA 2005 17 -3 Passed by House of Representatives

Japan 1990 25 -25 On the premise of attention with China

India

Korea 2020

(BAU) 30 mdashmdash

Discharge amount is up to 564million don

in estimation

China 2005 40~50 60~150

(2005) Each GDP

India 2005 20-25 mdashmdash With the developed countries

participation

Russia 1990 25 -25 Be neutral country

Norway 1990 30~40 -30~-40 mdashmdash

New

Zealand 1990 10~20 -10~ -20 mdashmdash

Austria 2000 5~25 -3~-11 mdashmdash

Canada 2003 20 -3 mdashmdash

Mexico 2002 50 mdashmdash With the developed countries

participation

South

Africa

2020

(BAU) 34 mdashmdash

With the developed countries

participation

Brazil 2020

(BAU) 36~39

-20

(2005) mdashmdash

(Korean Maritime Institute 20095)

9

22 The Definition of Green Port

As the global warming affecting in the world climate has been heavily changed

natural disaster frequently occurred natural resources depletion and supply

imbalance cause crisis to reach a high level For the purpose of getting away from

financial crisis and creating the new growth motivity the counties in the world

make more efforts on developing economic

Because of the realization of this global climate and environment crisis Korean

government had brought out the ldquoGreen Growth Policyrdquo And it made the ldquoGreen

Growth Policyrdquo be embodied and law-governed announced ldquoLow Carbon Green

Growth of the Basic Lawrdquo

In order to coordinate with this policy and law build up the ldquoGreen Growthrdquo

everyone make their efforts and reach ldquoGreen Growthrdquo in Korea each department

As a important industry department port authority also take activity to match the

national strategy of ldquoGreen Growthrdquo and draw up the plan on ldquoGreen Portrdquo

construction

However there isnrsquot a clear definition about the Green Port Korean Land

Transport and Maritime Ministry have explained the Green Port as follows Green

house gas Reducing Energy Effciencing Nature-friendly Port The explanation is

very easy to understand but from a professional point of view it not very

10

comprehensive and concrete So we have to understand the concept in the Green

Port Construction measures and programs There are about 4 kind explanation and

promotion programs in the Green Port Respectively the port which based on

green technology and green business creating new growth motive improving

living standards jumping in the ranks of the advanced port

ltFigure 2gt Green Port appearance and basic definition

In the Green Growth National Strategy Policy there are 10 pieces of policy

directions and 50 researches each department should choose the appropriate one

Follow these researches chose by port availability especially Low Carbon

11

Self-sufficiency Port The Disaster Safety Port Eco-friendly Port Resource

Recycling Port and in this study Green Port construction is a plan on

comprehensive and mix of 4kinds of Green Port Construction

Table 221 Four Promotions for Green Port Construction

Promotion Program

(Green Port type) Activities

Low-Carbon

Self-Sufficiency Port

Eco-friendly inland transportation system building

New renewable resources power equipment utilization

AMP LED utilization

The Disaster Safety

Port

Disaster Prevention environment infrastructure building

Disaster prediction and corresponding system utilization

Eco-Friendly Port Beauty the port by green park planting and so on

Provide eco-friendly port building programs

Resource Recycling

Port

Port waste (silt soil) effectively recycling system

Establish resource recycling port paragon

As table1 shown each type of Green Port has a separate emphasis

Eco-friendly inland transportation system which encourages utilizing rail canal

barge clean system reduces the truck application amount AMP means

Alternative Maritime Power supply system replaces with ship power generation

The Green Port construction in most of counties is the low-carbon self-sufficiency

12

port And in their construction maybe add a few other type promote director like

beauty the port by green park planting and so on

However in this study the Green Port concept is a comprehensive plan among

4 types not a specialization system

23 Green Port Construction Situation in major countries

After ltKyoto protocolgt having brought out each department began to take

affords on the reducing the GHG (greenhouse gas) emission In port department

the activities are embodied in the Green Port construction In this study many

major ports in US EU Japan and Korea are chose to explain for research

231 US

① LALB Port

In order to achieve to reduce marine pollutants standby and build clean port

LALB Port standby resource ministry and environment protection ministry

signed a 5year plan on clean standby action cooperation

This promotion business plan set a set of marine pollutants standby emission

limitation on the ship department from the statistics year 2006-2007 to 2010-2011

handling department heavy duty equipment truck department and so on Such as

13

in Green Port Technology construction department measures and programs are

shown in following Table

Table231 the details of LALB Port Green Port Promotion Programs

Promotion Program

Heavy Equipment Truck

Heavy Equipment

Replace and Update Aging Facilities

Substitute Fuels and Clean Fuel Incentives

Budgetary for the Development of Substitute Fuels

Marine Vessels Tugs

Ship Speed Reduction within the Port

Electrical supply of parking in the Berth

Use low-sulfur fuel (supplementary motor)

Handling Equipment

Air Quality Monitoring

Measure ambient air pollution levels in the vicinity of

the Port

Include a number of real-time air quality measurements

On the restrict situation of heavy equipment trucks and others vessels must to

be replaced and rebuilt in order to minimum the emission of NOx And the trucks

which donrsquot reach the regulate standard do not allowed to get in the port These

regulations will help their owner to replace and update trucks and also set up a

replacement plan to 16000 aging trucks make the replace done by 2012 As

foundation repaired the cargo owner must to pay an addition tax about 20ft 35$

40ft 79$

14

In the maritime department the speed reduction incentive took action in

Jan2005 When ship entry into the port boundary speed must be reduced under

20 miles 12kont At the beginning the effect of this plan is very clearly so the

limitation may be raised to 40mile And AMP (Alternative Maritime Power ) is

encouraged to be built and developed as to ship use their engine and get GHG

emission

② New York- New Jersey Port

The New York- New Jersey Port Authority brought out environment policy on

CO2 emission reduction The main concepts as following first reduce PX SOX

3 each year and CO2 5 Second ship must utilize sulfur-low fuel as a

obligation Third AMP is provided Forth modern the unloading and loading

equipment must be built Fifth promote trucks replacement Sixth reform the ship

engine Seventh invent 9 billion dollars in the following 10 years Eighth invent

to all hybrid equipment (325) Ninth install the hybrid truck in AMPT and

NYCT

③ Seattle Port

15

In Seattle Port Air Environment Maritime Improvement plan has been

accepted in 2005 The plan includes first set up Puget Sound Maritime Air

Forum and make one AMP provide services for two tour ships second change

the diesel hybrid equipment into electric utilization Third use bio-diesel and

diesel catalyst and reduce the emission Forth emphasize the standard and plan of

truck minimum the idling time

Seattle Port Tacoma Port and Vancouver made a assignment and promote

ldquoNorthwest Ports Clean Air Strategyrdquo

④ Auckland Port

Auckland Port set up the aging replacement plan in 2008 and invent 20 milion

dollars gas emission should reach the level And cargo transport system in port

hinterland port authority and Air environment management committee make

cooperation and give an incentive to truck which use new clean technology

Table232 Short term and Long term Green Port Plans in Auckland Port

16

17

232 EU

Rotterdam Port

As the biggest Port in EU Rotterdam Port takes more affords in reducing the

CO2 emission Main programs are low carbon footprint AMP and so on The

limitation of CO2 emission reduces down 50 of 1990 by 2025

In July 2008 the authority of Rotterdam port gave international cooperation

with other ports an extra boost by organizing the World Ports Climate Conference

During this conference the authority of Rotterdam discussed possible ways in

which ports and business could reduce air pollution and CO2 emissions The

proposals the authority of Rotterdam was set out in a declaration which was

supported by all 55 port cities attending the conference The conference resulted

in five projects to improve air quality and reduce CO2 emissions The authority of

Rotterdam is behind the project to further elaborate an Environmental Ship Index

The Rotterdam Climate Initiative is a joint venture with the municipality of

Rotterdam DCMR Environmental Protection Agency Rijnmond and Deltalinqs

Common goal is to halve CO2 emissions in the region by 2025 in comparison with

1990 levels In connection with the Rotterdam Climate Initiative the port works

on (together with DCMR and others) creating an infrastructure for the capture

18

transport and storage of CO2 A business case presented in the summer of 2008 is

now being elaborated into a business plan The business case concludes that

Rotterdam can begin in 2015 with the capture transport and underground storage

of five million tons of CO2 per annum This means that the basic infrastructure

will then be in place for further growth in capture and storage to twenty million

tons in 2025

In 2008 a start was made on the development of a sustainability index for

activities relating to the P for Planet (environment) In 2009 it will further expand

the index to cover the P for People and the P for Profit In the first phase of the

sustainability index CO2 footprint sustainable purchasing sustainable building

and sustainable land allocation will be covered

233 Japan

① Tacoma Port

In the Tacoma Port there are some programs on protecting the air water and

soil environment

In the air protection department ldquoNorthwest Ports Clean Air Strategyrdquo

ldquoGreen Gateway for Traderdquo and ldquoTruck Programrdquo had brought out to against air

pollution The concepts include using ultra-low sulfur diesel bio-diesel and other

cleaner-burning fuels in cargo-handling equipment using low-sulfur distillate

19

fuels at berth adding ldquogreen designrdquo environmental features to ships including

diesel-electric motors that save up to 30 percent in fuel and significantly reduce

emissions setting targets to change older less-efficient truck engines installing

anti-idling devices on rail-switching engines as well as partnering on other

innovative technological advance

The Port of Tacomarsquos four dockside rail yards move cargo quickly and

efficiently from container terminals They also reduce the number of trucks on

city streets and highways Each full train that leaves the Port represents 250 to 300

trucks not on our roads reducing roadway congestion and diesel emissions The

lowest emission route to ship cargo from Asia to the US Midwest is through the

Puget Sound according to the results of a study by Herbert Engineering released

in May 2009

And in the land protection program there are successful clean projects open

spaces and future habitat restoration In 2007 the Port purchased about 70 acres

of open space known as Juliarsquos Gulch and Storey Pit located between the

Tideflats and residential Northeast Tacoma Monitor water quality system is in

utilization in the water department in Tacoma Port

② Tokyo Port

In the Tokyo Port Green Port programs are almost similar with Tacoma Port

e-RTGC (Rubber Tired Gantry Crane) the barge between Tokyo and Yocohama

20

which shorten international maritime container cargo transportation land distance

super eco-shipbuilding technology dissemination and promotion green business

certification operation and shippers and logistics companies support cooperation

③ Osaka Port and Hakata Port

AMP electrical power equipment and solar power equipment are in utilization in

Osaka Port E-RTGC and solar power of refrigerated container are in utilization in

the Hakata Port

234 Korea

In Busan Port a set of Green Port took implementation such as LNG truck

E-RTGC equipment utilization eco-friendly transport means conversion (rail

canal barge) and GHG emission reduction obligation Table233

21

ltTable 233gt Summary of the Main Port of Green Port Measures

COUNTRY PORT MEASURES

US

LALB Port

Green flag AMP discharge gas reduction obligation

recommends use of alternative fuels and clean fuel

funding for the development of alternative fuels facilities

by new engine development instead of NOx emissions

green truck program (reduce70-80) low-sulfur fuel

utilization restore and revitalize the Los Cerritos

Wetlands

New York

Port

AMP modernized facilities utilization high speed hybrid

yard

Auckland

Port

Incentives on the new cleaning technology containers

transportation system

Seattle Port

AMP green ship membership Tier 4 level reducing PM

by 1994 level Smart Way program Northwest Ports

Clean Air Strategy

EU Rotterdam

Port

Clean engine (barge) green ship membership carbon

footprint calculation cruise ship which under port

authority change to use low-sulfur fuel low emission

engine development and utilization Green Award AMP

ship recycling incentives

Japan

Tokyo Port

RTGC (Rubber Tired Gantry Crane) apply for the barge

between Tokyo and Yocohama shorten international

maritime container cargo transportation land distance

super eco-shipbuilding technology dissemination and

promotion green business certification operation

shippers and logistics companies support cooperation

Osaka Port AMP electrical power equipment solar power equipment

Hakata Port E-RTGC solar power utilization in refrigerated container

Korea Busan Port

LNG truck E-RTGC eco-friendly transport means

conversion (rail canal barge) GHG emission reduction

obligation

22

24 Green Port Indicators Research

As the previous section list shown Green Port measures and programs are

substantially the same

When a ship entry in the port boundary from voyage many ports give a

incentive on shifting and utilizing sulfur-low fuel and reducing the speed under

20 miles when the ship berth in the port the alternative maritime power are

provided which replace its power generation

Next in the cargo unloading and loading department the same with above

utilization of sulfur-low fuel and electrical equipment are promoted and

eco-driving education to driver is necessary what speed is fuel fully burning and

emission minimum point

In the cargo transport department in other words truck department the

replacement on aging trucks is popular in many ports aging trucks are prohibited

close to port at the same time an incentive or support function are provided on

aging replacement The automated equipments are recommended to utilize in the

Green Port like hybrid yard tractor And a perfect plan on truck running also could

reduce the idling time and against the emission of CO2

The details reference the following Table 241

23

Table241 Green Port measures in port each department

Emission reduction programs

Ship

department

Shipping

in the

port

boundary

Obligation on the utilization of sulfur-low fuel

Reform ship engine and utilize hybrid

Speed reduce in the port entrance(a off-shore fee

incentive)

Off-shore AMP

Shift utilization system of clean fuel

Unloading and loading

department

Obligation on the utilization of sulfur-low fuel

Replace electrical equipment

Eco-driving

Truck department Hybrid yard tractor utilization

Promote aging truck replacement

Minimum the idling time

Others LED light in the Port

Develop renew and recycle resource energy

The Green Port measures in this study are e-RTGC AMP AGV Green Ship

certification system incentives on the new clean technology Green Flag(speed

reduction incentive)eco-friendly transport means conversion joint distribution

the cost on account of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction polities and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

The details and definition on each Green Port measure and the relationship with

Port Competitiveness will be expressed in next chapter

24

Chapter 3 The Relationship between Port

Competitiveness and Green Port Construction

31 Port Competitiveness Literature Review

Although past studies on port selection models have focused on port selection

made by port facilities port services port rates and charge and location

Murphy made a survey between 534 shipping companies and port authorities in

1989 and between 1850 shipping companies and port authorities in 1992

Comparing with other papers Murphys got a survey among more widely

objects In his paper port selection(port competitiveness) was seen to affected by

facilities situation appropriate pilotage max ship entrance probability the

25

capability of handling non-regular cargos whether to provide information of ship

nationality or not and port services level

In French model (1979) there are two factors affecting the port selection (port

competitiveness) endogenous factor and exogenous factor In endogenous factors

there are adequacy and physical plant condition of terminal facilities terminal rate

and charges frequency and geographic coverage of ship and freight services the

capacity of connecting to inland rails or transport net and the services provides for

the shipping or logistics And exogenous factors included the size and economic

capacity of hinterland as a source exports or market for imports national

economic situation trade policy and support established by government the

situation at home and abroad

The same as Frenchs paper in Paters paper in 1990 there are endogenous and

exogenous factors too In endogenous there are the services provides for the

shipping or logistics capacity of terminal facilities situation and condition of

facilities operation strategies established by port authority convenience to utilize

And the political situation at home and abroad social change economic factor

stabilized labor and capital However in 2004 there is a tremendous change in

Peters new paper There are four parts multi-modal process interface transport

modes infrastructure Multi-model Process part includes ship entrance rapid

speed and accuracy shipper and shipping companies reactive operation flexibility

Interface includes labor power information technology and so on And there are

26

ship calls frequency and amount of fleet factors in the transport modes part In the

infrastructure part includes port facility equipments and so on

Port facilities rates and charges services inland situation and social

circumstance factors affect the port selection and competitiveness a lot from the

research until 1992 by Murphy And in Lirn and Pater research 2003-2004 the

new and detail factors are shown to us

We can clearly see the contents in next table

27

Table 311 Prevention literature research results

Influence factors

French

(1979)

Endogenous

port facilities port rate and charges calls frequency port services

port connection with inland

Exogenous

economic size of hinterland national economic situation trade

policy home and abroad situation

Willingale

(1982)

voyage distance economy size entrance to port and route port

facilities max ship entrance probability port operation rates and

charges port authority scale of port

Slack

(1985)

cost of inland transportation port proximity ship demurrage

multi-transport

Peter

(1990)

Endogenous

port facilities condition of facilities operation strategies

convenience to utilize

Exogenous

political situation social change economic factor stabilized labor

and capital

UNCTAD

(1992)

port facilities services location level of financial industry

information communication system social circumstances economic

stability

Murphy

(1992)

facilities situation appropriate pilotage max ship entrance

probability the capability of handling non-regular cargos whether to

provide information of ship nationality or not port services level

Lirn

(2003-2004)

physical and technologic facilities geopolitical location port

operation and management shipping and terminal cost

Peter

(2004)

Multi-modal Process

ship entrance rapid speed and accuracy shipper and shipping

companies reactive operation flexibility

Interface labor and capital

Transport modes ship calls frequency and amount of fleet factors

28

And there are many experts and scholars research for the influence factors to

port selection and competitiveness in Korea The specific content follows table5

Table 312 Literature research in Korean academia

Influence factors

Jeon Il-su (1992) location facilities charges service level (EDI) terminal operation

port authority

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

( 1993 )

location facilities throughput charges service operation

situation

Kim Hak-so

(1993)

export shipping amount of annual cost of each ton of cargo

marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km of

cargo loading time

import marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km

of cargo amount of liner ship

Yeo Gi-tae (1996) location facilities throughput charge service operation situation

Ha Dong-u amp

Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

location facilities service level logistics charges environment of

logistics service

Yeo Gi-tae (1999) location facilities throughput charges service

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

throughput quay length yard area GNP

Kum Jong-su

(2001)

distance between port and cargo site terminal facilities service

the capacity of multi-transport capacity of cargo handling

administrative service rates and charges of inland transport

congestion

Yeo Gi-tae (2002) location throughput facilities service level

Kim Jin-gu (2002) port facilities location cargo amount rates and charges services

29

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005)

voyage degree to attract cargo cargo handling cost amount of

handling cargo connection to inland service reliability location

berth availability quay length feeder network depth

transshipment volumes cargo security profitability

offing degree to attract cargo berth availability cargo handling

cost transshipment volumes

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005)

cargo handling amount port facilities location rates and charges

level of service

Heo Yun-su

(2005)

port facilities rates and charges services marketing geopolitics

location economic and social circumstance

Kim Geun-seop

(2007)

port services facilities cargo handling amount location cost

productivity factor global factor

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) rates and charges services port characteristics

Many experts and scholars make a research on port selection and

competitiveness recently But the factors selection criteria are difference

Nevertheless the main factors are facilities services cost and so on

Therefore port competitiveness factors which chose in this study are port

facilities port services port rates and charges and social circumstance

However the main factors are not the whole factors any more more and more

detail factors and characteristic factors appearance Port selection and

competitiveness factors have changed And the development content is introduced

in next part

30

32 Port Competitiveness Development Tree

As mentioned above port facilities port rates and charges and port location are

the basic factors in the port selection and competitiveness

From the following table we can discover that first one facilities rates and

charges and location are the most important factor in port selection and

competitiveness second one the importance of social circumstance turns larger

inland connection is necessary all the time

Table 321 Main factor in the Pretentious Research

31

port facilities rates and

charges

inland

connection

social

circumstance location

French (1979) radic radic radic

Wiliingale (1982) radic radic

Slack (1985) radic

Pater (1990) radic radic

UNCTAD (1992) radic radic radic

Murphy(1992) radic

Jeon Il-su (1992) radic radic radic

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

(1993)

radic radic radic

Kim Hak-so

(1993) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1996) radic radic radic

Ha Dong-u

amp Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1998) radic radic radic

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

radic

Kum Jong-su

(2001) radic radic radic radic

Kim Jin-gu(2002) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(2002) radic radic

Lirn(2003-2004) radic radic radic

Pater(2004) radic

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005) radic radic radic

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005) radic radic radic

Heo Yun-su

(2005) radic radic radic radic

Kim Geun-seop

(2007) radic radic radic radic

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) radic

32

33 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green

Port Construction

Following the research above Port facilities rates and charges inland

connection and social circumstance are chose in this study port selection and

competitiveness department

e-RTGC Electric rubber tired gantry crane is a mobile gantry crane used for

stacking intermodal containers within the stacking areas of a container terminal

e-RTGC are used at container terminals and container storage yards to straddling

multiple lanes of railroad and container storage or when maximum storage

density in the container stack is desired

AMP is shorted for Alternative Marine Power and Itrsquos a facility which

provides the electric system in the land for ship which entry in the port The

facility can reduce emissions which ship get entrance in the port

AGV is a mobile robot that follows markers or wires in the floor or uses

vision or lasers They are most often used in industrial applications to move

materials around a manufacturing facility or a warehouse Automatic Guided

Vehicle systems work around-the-clock making continuous flow and just-in-time

delivery easier to achieve Application of the automatic guided vehicle has broade

33

ned during the late 20th century and they are no longer restricted to industrial

environments

The e-RTGC AMP and AGV are the new clean facilities and equipments in the

Green Port they donrsquot reduce the efficiency of handling cargo and they also

reduce the CO2 emission account

Green ship certification system if a ship utilizes clean and CO2 emission

reduction technology on the ship building adds equipment and management and

son on certification would be received And the port authority gives some

incentive and preferential treatment among 45 ports Such as a better schedule is

provided for green membership ship priority in handing cargo and discount on

entrance fee

Incentives on the new cleaning technology There are two expressions about

this measure one is that the port authority give a incentive to ship which have a

great utilization on the new cleaning technology and the other one is that

environment provide many incentives to the authority which utilize the new

cleaning technology in the port such as LED street lamp solar power cranes

Green flag The Green Flag incentive program was set up to encourage ships to

slow down in order to improve air quality The Green Flag program provides

approximately $2 million a year in discounts for vessel operators who slow their

ships to 12 knots (22kmh) or less within 20miles (32km) of the harbor

34

According to the Port the Green Flag program reduced air pollution by 600tons in

2007 and is expected to do better in 2008

All of Green ship certification system incentives on the new cleaning

technology and Green Flag are incentives provided for users of port and aimed at

reduce port rates and charges So the 3 measures belong to affect port rates and

charges

Eco-friendly transport means conversion Eco-friendly means of transport are

much accounted of green port for example railway discharge less GHG emission

than truck barge with a clean engine among the river and inshore canal

Joint distribution joint distribution is a collaborative system which port

provides among many logistics companies It can make the cargo handling speed

rapidly and reduce cargo storage time for CO2 emission reducing such as

refrigerated container In an addition it also makes the logistics companies

transport more efficient

Cost on amount of CO2 emission differenced from other port the cost on

amount of CO2 is included in the port cost The cost aims to reduce the CO2

emission directly

CO2 emission reduction policies compared with other traditional port Green

Port gives more cost discount and incentives but in an addition there are many

policies on CO2 emission restriction Such as aging trucks restrictions in inland

transport department ship entry speed reduced and fuel changed in the ship

35

department and so on Whether these restriction policies constrain port

development or not and the degree of these policies constrain port development

will be explain by the AHP results

Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors some ports in the

western countries are opened as a travel place for visitors so as to change the

polluted impress and raise the position in our heart

Cost on amount of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction policies and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors can affect the social

circumstance factor Whether these measures can or not improve the social

circumstance and port competitiveness we have to see the next calculation and

results

36

Chapter 4 The Green Port Competitiveness

Analysis

41 The Green Port Competitiveness Model by AHP

The AHP is one multi-criteria decision making method which has been

extensively applied to a variety of decision-making situations The multi-criteria

techniques are considered to be a promising framework for evaluation of

decision-making factors since they have the potential to take into account

conflicting multidimensional incommensurable and uncertain effects of

decisions explicitly

In order to apply the AHP method a hierarchical decision schema was

constructed by decomposing the decision problem into its decision elements

37

After that the importance or preferences of the decision elements are examined in

a pair-wise comparison to the elements in the hierarchy The parameters are

estimated using pair-wise comparisons between the importance of the attribute or

decision element in the function using data made by each responder Making

comparisons is a question of which of the two attributes is more import as well as

how much more important

Follow these theories the Green Port Competitiveness Model choose factors as

follow in port competitiveness factors part there are port facilities port rates and

charges inland connection social circumstance in Green Port construction part

there are e-RTGC AMP AGV green ship certification system green flag

incentives on the new cleaning technology eco-friendly transport means

conversion joint distribution CO2 emission reduction policies cost on amount of

CO2 emission beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

38

Figure 41 Green Port Competitiveness AHP model

Follow the Green Port Competitiveness AHP as shown we set a questionnaire

survey to many experts scholars working in logistics system area And we got 15

ones and 14 ones results are believable and integrated

42 Green Port Competitiveness Analysis

39

The key to construction of the factors which affects the port competitiveness

is to determine the conceptual model The selection of the factors directly affects

the evaluation of the result In order to ensure the accuracy objectivity and

practicality of evaluation results the following basic principles must be followed

when selecting factors systematic principles the principle of universal

comparability practical principle and goal-oriented principle In view of the

foregoing the competitiveness which affected by Green Port construction model

is made The analysis follows established principles of port competitiveness

evaluation taking into account the characteristics and functions of the port as well

as port facilities port services port rates and charges ship entrance inland

connection social circumstances and so on

(1) Port facilities

e-RTGC U11 AMP U12 AGV U13

(2) Port rates and charges

Green ship certification system U21 Incentives on the new clean

technology U22 Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

(3) Inland connection

Eco-friendly means of transport U31 Joint distribution U32

(4) Social circumstances

40

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41 CO2 emission reduction policies

U42 Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors U43

Table 421 Details of Level I and Level II values

Level I

indicators Symbol Level II indicators Symbol

Port facilities A1

e-RTGC U11

AMP U12

AGV U13

Port rates and

charges A2

Green ship certification system U21

Incentives on the new clean technology U22

Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

Inland

connection A3

Eco-friendly means of transport U31

Joint distribution U32

Social

circumstances A4

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41

CO2 emissions reduction policies U42

Beautiful environment construction in inner

harbors U43

41

I Determination of level I indicator weights

As the ports competitiveness evaluation indicators at this level are complex

and the elements are not easily quantified AHP is adopted to determine the

indicator weights with the basic steps as follows

(1) Establish a comparative judgment matrix The comparative judgment

matrix is obtained through comparing contributed proportion of multiple

indicators to the overall target by the judgment scale wherein the fuzzy

judgment number introduced is 1 3 5 7 and 9 and the reciprocal of

such number indicates the important degree of one element relatively to

another The results are shown in next table

Table 422 Comparison matrix of level I indicators

A1 A2 A3 A4

A1 1 15 13 3

A2 5 1 3 7

A3 3 13 1 5

A4 13 17 15 1

(2) Calculate the characteristic vector of the comparative judgment matrix

which refers to the weighted vector of the indicator The writer adopts

42

the geometric method to calculate the characteristic vector The

calculated result is as follows

ω=(012 0560 026 006)T λmax=418 It can be obtained from the table

RI=09 Wherein ω is the characteristic vector corresponding to the

maximum characteristic value λmax of the comparative judgment matrix

namely the weighted vector of the indicator RI is the average

consistency indicator as shown in following table

Table423 Average random consistency indicator RI

Matrix Order

RI

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

0 0 058 09 112 124 132 141

Matrix Order

RI

9 10 11 12 13 14 15

145 149 152 154 156 158 159

(3) Conduct consistency check on the comparative judgment matrix Adopt

the random consistency proportion CR to judge the consistency of the

comparative judgment matrix According to CI= (λmax -n)(n-1) and

CR=CIRI it can be obtained through calculation CR=007lt01 Thus

this comparative judgment matrix has a satisfactory consistency and the

indicator weight coefficient calculated through this matrix is acceptable

43

II Determination of level II indicator weights

The data at this level are the details of level Ⅰ indicator The judgment

matrix obtained through comparing multiple sub-indicators under Level Ⅰ

indicators is adopted to determine the weights of sub-indicators under each

indicator one by one The specific steps are as follows

(1) The experts score the weights within the given range To determine the

weights of several small indicators under the same big indicator it is

supposed that the score of small indicator ｋ under the indicator j made

by the expert i is Xijk wherein i=12n n is the total number of

experts ј=12m m is the total number of LevelⅡ indicator к

=12Oj Oj is the number of small indicators under the big indicator ј

іјк IJK LRC l I j k

(2) The credit rating of the expert і is l l =1 2 3 l =1 indicates this expert

is quite familiar with the evaluated contents l =2 indicator this expert is

44

with the evaluated contents l =3 indicates this expert is not quite familiar

with the evaluated contents yi1 is the=08 yi2 =05 and yi3=1

(3) The comprehensive evaluation score of small indicator l under the

indicator j is as follows

(4) The formula for normalization processing of indicator weights is as

follows and the absolute weight of the indicator set is marked as

q=(q1q2q11)

(5) Because of the same justification and principle we donrsquot give the detail

about the calculation The same with the level Ⅰ calculation we

manipulation data one by one and get 14 results And obtain the average

45

results by weighted average method The results detail as Table for the

final weights of Level-Ⅱ evaluation indicators

Above the calculation process and method are just one of data from the

questionable surveys In this study the final results are got from the

weighted average by the results of each questionable survey

The final results are shown as Table424

Table424 Indicator weights table of indicator system

Level I

indicators Weight LevelⅡ indicators

Relative

weight

Absolute

weight

Importance

percentage

Port Facilities

A1 02735

e-RTGC U11 05506 01506 1506

AMP U12 01648 00451 451

AGV U13 02826 00773 773

Port Rates and

Charges A2

02902

Green ship certification s

ystem U21 04724 01371 1371

Incentives on the new

clean technology U22 02871 00833 833

Green Flag (speed

reduction incentive)U23 02405 00698 698

Inland

connection A3

02865

Eco-friendly means of

transport U31 05942 01702 1702

Joint distribution U32 04058 01163 1163

Social

environmentA4 00863

Cost on amount of CO2

emission U41 03698 00319 319

CO2 emissions reduction

policies U42 02273 00196 196

Beautiful environment

construction in inner

harbors U43

04029 00348 348

46

III Case study

In the questionable survey we also got the mark of Green Port measures

evaluation value of many main ports such as Singapore Port Shanghai Port

Hongkong Port Busan Port LALB Port Rotterdam Port and Yocohama Port

The highest mark is 5 and lowest one is 1

Table425 Evaluation value of many main ports

Singapore

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

LALB

Port

Rotterdam

Port

Yocohama

Port

Port facilities 38000 36000 34000 38182 38000 42000 32000

Port rates and

charges 32000 36000 31000 35455 32000 39000 33000

Inland

connection 39000 34545 35000 29091 35000 45000 36000

Social

circumstance 42000 32727 41000 32000 38000 42727 36000

With the Green Port and Port competitiveness indicator weights results these

ports got the final evaluation value

47

Table426 Final evaluation value on main ports Green Port measures and

competitiveness

Rotterdam

Port

Singapore

Port

LALB

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

Yocohama

Port

394 345 330 330 319 318 317

43 Results Analysis

From the results table we can obtain the many results as following

① The main Green Port measures which are more important to improve port

competitiveness are Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system the indicator weights are 01702 01506 and

01371 among the 11 indicators

② In the Green Port construction Cost on amount of CO2 emission and CO2

emissions reduction policies are the restrictions indicators but the weight

of two indicators are not big 00319 and 00196 So effect on Green Port

construction to port competitiveness does have the weaken capacity but

not clearly strengthen more clearly Thus Green Port construction really

could improve the port competitiveness

48

③ In the case study traditional ports Rotterdam and Singapore Port give us

better examples on Green Port construction especially Rotterdam Port

④ Hongkong Busan and Yocohama Port all got a lower evaluation value

But in detail Hongkong and Yocohama Port got a lower on the port

facilities and rates and charges Busan Port got a higher on the port

facilities and rates and charges but a lower on the inland connection and

social circumstance

⑤ Shanghai Port doesnrsquot have Particular strength factors but the

comprehensive strength is not bad the same as LALB Port

49

Chapter 5 Conclusion

In this thesis the effects of Green Port construction for improving the port

competitiveness have been studied Under the definition of Green Port the

characteristics of Green Port and its effects has been shown by analysing the AHP

method which based on the questionary survey for Green Port specialists and port

officers

Follow the results of analysis on Green Port competitiveness AHP model

Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green ship certification system is

better for Green Port Construction welcome for shipping companies and citizens

who live around the port And in the analysis of Port competitiveness factors port

rates and charges always affects port competitiveness a lot As a trend inland

connection factor abstracts more attention of shipping companies

50

On the trend of port department each port should take a activity to adjust

strategy for improving its competitiveness Such as in the main ports evaluation

Busan port get a high value on port rates and charges and port facilities but as a

lower value on inland connection factor the final value is not as well as we look

forward In the evaluation of Singapore Port through it gets a lower value on rates

and charges higher value on inland connection and social circumstance causes the

final value are better So the Green Port Construction may be a trend in port

department

In the results of this thesis Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system are better solutions for Green Port Construction And

especially it can be verified that the port rates and charges always affects port

competitiveness Futhermore the investment for Green Port construction and its

effects have to be verified in the future

51

References

1 Hoyle B S and Smith J 1992 Transport and Development In Modern

transport geography edited by B S Hoyle R D Knowles (London Belhaven

Press)pp11-31

2 Beresford A K C De Souza A J R G and Pettit S J 2005 Stategic

development of liner shipping companies and terminal operators Ocean yearbook

19(Chicago 1L The University of Chicago Press) pp 732-750

3 Heaver T D 2002 Supply chain and logistics management implications for

liner shipping In The handbook of maritime economics and business edited by C

Grammenos (LondonLLP) pp 375-396

4 Park T E (2011) A Study on selection criteria of Green Port and evaluation of

major Korean port A masters thesis of graduate school of Incheon university

52

5 JeongBH (2009)Green port management policy directions in the green

growth era- The case of Gwangyang port in Republic of Korea Journal of Korea

Port Economic Association Vol25(3) p361-384

6 Lee J S Han N H(2009) A study on Green Port Revitalization According to

Air Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

7 Lee Y K Nan J W(2010)Green Logistics Policy Analysis and Implications

of Japan

8 Lee B S (2010)Tendency and Countermeasures on Green Logistics in Port

Logistics Company A masters thesis of graduate school of Korean Maritime

university

9 Lee J S (2009) A Study on Green Port Revitalization According to Air

Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

10 Zhang F Y Li Z Lu X J Yao X L(2008)Competitiveness of Inland

Ports Based on F-AHP

11 Port of Long Beach (2009) Green Port Policy wwwpolbcom

12 The port of Los Angeles wwwportoflosangelesorg

9

22 The Definition of Green Port

As the global warming affecting in the world climate has been heavily changed

natural disaster frequently occurred natural resources depletion and supply

imbalance cause crisis to reach a high level For the purpose of getting away from

financial crisis and creating the new growth motivity the counties in the world

make more efforts on developing economic

Because of the realization of this global climate and environment crisis Korean

government had brought out the ldquoGreen Growth Policyrdquo And it made the ldquoGreen

Growth Policyrdquo be embodied and law-governed announced ldquoLow Carbon Green

Growth of the Basic Lawrdquo

In order to coordinate with this policy and law build up the ldquoGreen Growthrdquo

everyone make their efforts and reach ldquoGreen Growthrdquo in Korea each department

As a important industry department port authority also take activity to match the

national strategy of ldquoGreen Growthrdquo and draw up the plan on ldquoGreen Portrdquo

construction

However there isnrsquot a clear definition about the Green Port Korean Land

Transport and Maritime Ministry have explained the Green Port as follows Green

house gas Reducing Energy Effciencing Nature-friendly Port The explanation is

very easy to understand but from a professional point of view it not very

10

comprehensive and concrete So we have to understand the concept in the Green

Port Construction measures and programs There are about 4 kind explanation and

promotion programs in the Green Port Respectively the port which based on

green technology and green business creating new growth motive improving

living standards jumping in the ranks of the advanced port

ltFigure 2gt Green Port appearance and basic definition

In the Green Growth National Strategy Policy there are 10 pieces of policy

directions and 50 researches each department should choose the appropriate one

Follow these researches chose by port availability especially Low Carbon

11

Self-sufficiency Port The Disaster Safety Port Eco-friendly Port Resource

Recycling Port and in this study Green Port construction is a plan on

comprehensive and mix of 4kinds of Green Port Construction

Table 221 Four Promotions for Green Port Construction

Promotion Program

(Green Port type) Activities

Low-Carbon

Self-Sufficiency Port

Eco-friendly inland transportation system building

New renewable resources power equipment utilization

AMP LED utilization

The Disaster Safety

Port

Disaster Prevention environment infrastructure building

Disaster prediction and corresponding system utilization

Eco-Friendly Port Beauty the port by green park planting and so on

Provide eco-friendly port building programs

Resource Recycling

Port

Port waste (silt soil) effectively recycling system

Establish resource recycling port paragon

As table1 shown each type of Green Port has a separate emphasis

Eco-friendly inland transportation system which encourages utilizing rail canal

barge clean system reduces the truck application amount AMP means

Alternative Maritime Power supply system replaces with ship power generation

The Green Port construction in most of counties is the low-carbon self-sufficiency

12

port And in their construction maybe add a few other type promote director like

beauty the port by green park planting and so on

However in this study the Green Port concept is a comprehensive plan among

4 types not a specialization system

23 Green Port Construction Situation in major countries

After ltKyoto protocolgt having brought out each department began to take

affords on the reducing the GHG (greenhouse gas) emission In port department

the activities are embodied in the Green Port construction In this study many

major ports in US EU Japan and Korea are chose to explain for research

231 US

① LALB Port

In order to achieve to reduce marine pollutants standby and build clean port

LALB Port standby resource ministry and environment protection ministry

signed a 5year plan on clean standby action cooperation

This promotion business plan set a set of marine pollutants standby emission

limitation on the ship department from the statistics year 2006-2007 to 2010-2011

handling department heavy duty equipment truck department and so on Such as

13

in Green Port Technology construction department measures and programs are

shown in following Table

Table231 the details of LALB Port Green Port Promotion Programs

Promotion Program

Heavy Equipment Truck

Heavy Equipment

Replace and Update Aging Facilities

Substitute Fuels and Clean Fuel Incentives

Budgetary for the Development of Substitute Fuels

Marine Vessels Tugs

Ship Speed Reduction within the Port

Electrical supply of parking in the Berth

Use low-sulfur fuel (supplementary motor)

Handling Equipment

Air Quality Monitoring

Measure ambient air pollution levels in the vicinity of

the Port

Include a number of real-time air quality measurements

On the restrict situation of heavy equipment trucks and others vessels must to

be replaced and rebuilt in order to minimum the emission of NOx And the trucks

which donrsquot reach the regulate standard do not allowed to get in the port These

regulations will help their owner to replace and update trucks and also set up a

replacement plan to 16000 aging trucks make the replace done by 2012 As

foundation repaired the cargo owner must to pay an addition tax about 20ft 35$

40ft 79$

14

In the maritime department the speed reduction incentive took action in

Jan2005 When ship entry into the port boundary speed must be reduced under

20 miles 12kont At the beginning the effect of this plan is very clearly so the

limitation may be raised to 40mile And AMP (Alternative Maritime Power ) is

encouraged to be built and developed as to ship use their engine and get GHG

emission

② New York- New Jersey Port

The New York- New Jersey Port Authority brought out environment policy on

CO2 emission reduction The main concepts as following first reduce PX SOX

3 each year and CO2 5 Second ship must utilize sulfur-low fuel as a

obligation Third AMP is provided Forth modern the unloading and loading

equipment must be built Fifth promote trucks replacement Sixth reform the ship

engine Seventh invent 9 billion dollars in the following 10 years Eighth invent

to all hybrid equipment (325) Ninth install the hybrid truck in AMPT and

NYCT

③ Seattle Port

15

In Seattle Port Air Environment Maritime Improvement plan has been

accepted in 2005 The plan includes first set up Puget Sound Maritime Air

Forum and make one AMP provide services for two tour ships second change

the diesel hybrid equipment into electric utilization Third use bio-diesel and

diesel catalyst and reduce the emission Forth emphasize the standard and plan of

truck minimum the idling time

Seattle Port Tacoma Port and Vancouver made a assignment and promote

ldquoNorthwest Ports Clean Air Strategyrdquo

④ Auckland Port

Auckland Port set up the aging replacement plan in 2008 and invent 20 milion

dollars gas emission should reach the level And cargo transport system in port

hinterland port authority and Air environment management committee make

cooperation and give an incentive to truck which use new clean technology

Table232 Short term and Long term Green Port Plans in Auckland Port

16

17

232 EU

Rotterdam Port

As the biggest Port in EU Rotterdam Port takes more affords in reducing the

CO2 emission Main programs are low carbon footprint AMP and so on The

limitation of CO2 emission reduces down 50 of 1990 by 2025

In July 2008 the authority of Rotterdam port gave international cooperation

with other ports an extra boost by organizing the World Ports Climate Conference

During this conference the authority of Rotterdam discussed possible ways in

which ports and business could reduce air pollution and CO2 emissions The

proposals the authority of Rotterdam was set out in a declaration which was

supported by all 55 port cities attending the conference The conference resulted

in five projects to improve air quality and reduce CO2 emissions The authority of

Rotterdam is behind the project to further elaborate an Environmental Ship Index

The Rotterdam Climate Initiative is a joint venture with the municipality of

Rotterdam DCMR Environmental Protection Agency Rijnmond and Deltalinqs

Common goal is to halve CO2 emissions in the region by 2025 in comparison with

1990 levels In connection with the Rotterdam Climate Initiative the port works

on (together with DCMR and others) creating an infrastructure for the capture

18

transport and storage of CO2 A business case presented in the summer of 2008 is

now being elaborated into a business plan The business case concludes that

Rotterdam can begin in 2015 with the capture transport and underground storage

of five million tons of CO2 per annum This means that the basic infrastructure

will then be in place for further growth in capture and storage to twenty million

tons in 2025

In 2008 a start was made on the development of a sustainability index for

activities relating to the P for Planet (environment) In 2009 it will further expand

the index to cover the P for People and the P for Profit In the first phase of the

sustainability index CO2 footprint sustainable purchasing sustainable building

and sustainable land allocation will be covered

233 Japan

① Tacoma Port

In the Tacoma Port there are some programs on protecting the air water and

soil environment

In the air protection department ldquoNorthwest Ports Clean Air Strategyrdquo

ldquoGreen Gateway for Traderdquo and ldquoTruck Programrdquo had brought out to against air

pollution The concepts include using ultra-low sulfur diesel bio-diesel and other

cleaner-burning fuels in cargo-handling equipment using low-sulfur distillate

19

fuels at berth adding ldquogreen designrdquo environmental features to ships including

diesel-electric motors that save up to 30 percent in fuel and significantly reduce

emissions setting targets to change older less-efficient truck engines installing

anti-idling devices on rail-switching engines as well as partnering on other

innovative technological advance

The Port of Tacomarsquos four dockside rail yards move cargo quickly and

efficiently from container terminals They also reduce the number of trucks on

city streets and highways Each full train that leaves the Port represents 250 to 300

trucks not on our roads reducing roadway congestion and diesel emissions The

lowest emission route to ship cargo from Asia to the US Midwest is through the

Puget Sound according to the results of a study by Herbert Engineering released

in May 2009

And in the land protection program there are successful clean projects open

spaces and future habitat restoration In 2007 the Port purchased about 70 acres

of open space known as Juliarsquos Gulch and Storey Pit located between the

Tideflats and residential Northeast Tacoma Monitor water quality system is in

utilization in the water department in Tacoma Port

② Tokyo Port

In the Tokyo Port Green Port programs are almost similar with Tacoma Port

e-RTGC (Rubber Tired Gantry Crane) the barge between Tokyo and Yocohama

20

which shorten international maritime container cargo transportation land distance

super eco-shipbuilding technology dissemination and promotion green business

certification operation and shippers and logistics companies support cooperation

③ Osaka Port and Hakata Port

AMP electrical power equipment and solar power equipment are in utilization in

Osaka Port E-RTGC and solar power of refrigerated container are in utilization in

the Hakata Port

234 Korea

In Busan Port a set of Green Port took implementation such as LNG truck

E-RTGC equipment utilization eco-friendly transport means conversion (rail

canal barge) and GHG emission reduction obligation Table233

21

ltTable 233gt Summary of the Main Port of Green Port Measures

COUNTRY PORT MEASURES

US

LALB Port

Green flag AMP discharge gas reduction obligation

recommends use of alternative fuels and clean fuel

funding for the development of alternative fuels facilities

by new engine development instead of NOx emissions

green truck program (reduce70-80) low-sulfur fuel

utilization restore and revitalize the Los Cerritos

Wetlands

New York

Port

AMP modernized facilities utilization high speed hybrid

yard

Auckland

Port

Incentives on the new cleaning technology containers

transportation system

Seattle Port

AMP green ship membership Tier 4 level reducing PM

by 1994 level Smart Way program Northwest Ports

Clean Air Strategy

EU Rotterdam

Port

Clean engine (barge) green ship membership carbon

footprint calculation cruise ship which under port

authority change to use low-sulfur fuel low emission

engine development and utilization Green Award AMP

ship recycling incentives

Japan

Tokyo Port

RTGC (Rubber Tired Gantry Crane) apply for the barge

between Tokyo and Yocohama shorten international

maritime container cargo transportation land distance

super eco-shipbuilding technology dissemination and

promotion green business certification operation

shippers and logistics companies support cooperation

Osaka Port AMP electrical power equipment solar power equipment

Hakata Port E-RTGC solar power utilization in refrigerated container

Korea Busan Port

LNG truck E-RTGC eco-friendly transport means

conversion (rail canal barge) GHG emission reduction

obligation

22

24 Green Port Indicators Research

As the previous section list shown Green Port measures and programs are

substantially the same

When a ship entry in the port boundary from voyage many ports give a

incentive on shifting and utilizing sulfur-low fuel and reducing the speed under

20 miles when the ship berth in the port the alternative maritime power are

provided which replace its power generation

Next in the cargo unloading and loading department the same with above

utilization of sulfur-low fuel and electrical equipment are promoted and

eco-driving education to driver is necessary what speed is fuel fully burning and

emission minimum point

In the cargo transport department in other words truck department the

replacement on aging trucks is popular in many ports aging trucks are prohibited

close to port at the same time an incentive or support function are provided on

aging replacement The automated equipments are recommended to utilize in the

Green Port like hybrid yard tractor And a perfect plan on truck running also could

reduce the idling time and against the emission of CO2

The details reference the following Table 241

23

Table241 Green Port measures in port each department

Emission reduction programs

Ship

department

Shipping

in the

port

boundary

Obligation on the utilization of sulfur-low fuel

Reform ship engine and utilize hybrid

Speed reduce in the port entrance(a off-shore fee

incentive)

Off-shore AMP

Shift utilization system of clean fuel

Unloading and loading

department

Obligation on the utilization of sulfur-low fuel

Replace electrical equipment

Eco-driving

Truck department Hybrid yard tractor utilization

Promote aging truck replacement

Minimum the idling time

Others LED light in the Port

Develop renew and recycle resource energy

The Green Port measures in this study are e-RTGC AMP AGV Green Ship

certification system incentives on the new clean technology Green Flag(speed

reduction incentive)eco-friendly transport means conversion joint distribution

the cost on account of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction polities and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

The details and definition on each Green Port measure and the relationship with

Port Competitiveness will be expressed in next chapter

24

Chapter 3 The Relationship between Port

Competitiveness and Green Port Construction

31 Port Competitiveness Literature Review

Although past studies on port selection models have focused on port selection

made by port facilities port services port rates and charge and location

Murphy made a survey between 534 shipping companies and port authorities in

1989 and between 1850 shipping companies and port authorities in 1992

Comparing with other papers Murphys got a survey among more widely

objects In his paper port selection(port competitiveness) was seen to affected by

facilities situation appropriate pilotage max ship entrance probability the

25

capability of handling non-regular cargos whether to provide information of ship

nationality or not and port services level

In French model (1979) there are two factors affecting the port selection (port

competitiveness) endogenous factor and exogenous factor In endogenous factors

there are adequacy and physical plant condition of terminal facilities terminal rate

and charges frequency and geographic coverage of ship and freight services the

capacity of connecting to inland rails or transport net and the services provides for

the shipping or logistics And exogenous factors included the size and economic

capacity of hinterland as a source exports or market for imports national

economic situation trade policy and support established by government the

situation at home and abroad

The same as Frenchs paper in Paters paper in 1990 there are endogenous and

exogenous factors too In endogenous there are the services provides for the

shipping or logistics capacity of terminal facilities situation and condition of

facilities operation strategies established by port authority convenience to utilize

And the political situation at home and abroad social change economic factor

stabilized labor and capital However in 2004 there is a tremendous change in

Peters new paper There are four parts multi-modal process interface transport

modes infrastructure Multi-model Process part includes ship entrance rapid

speed and accuracy shipper and shipping companies reactive operation flexibility

Interface includes labor power information technology and so on And there are

26

ship calls frequency and amount of fleet factors in the transport modes part In the

infrastructure part includes port facility equipments and so on

Port facilities rates and charges services inland situation and social

circumstance factors affect the port selection and competitiveness a lot from the

research until 1992 by Murphy And in Lirn and Pater research 2003-2004 the

new and detail factors are shown to us

We can clearly see the contents in next table

27

Table 311 Prevention literature research results

Influence factors

French

(1979)

Endogenous

port facilities port rate and charges calls frequency port services

port connection with inland

Exogenous

economic size of hinterland national economic situation trade

policy home and abroad situation

Willingale

(1982)

voyage distance economy size entrance to port and route port

facilities max ship entrance probability port operation rates and

charges port authority scale of port

Slack

(1985)

cost of inland transportation port proximity ship demurrage

multi-transport

Peter

(1990)

Endogenous

port facilities condition of facilities operation strategies

convenience to utilize

Exogenous

political situation social change economic factor stabilized labor

and capital

UNCTAD

(1992)

port facilities services location level of financial industry

information communication system social circumstances economic

stability

Murphy

(1992)

facilities situation appropriate pilotage max ship entrance

probability the capability of handling non-regular cargos whether to

provide information of ship nationality or not port services level

Lirn

(2003-2004)

physical and technologic facilities geopolitical location port

operation and management shipping and terminal cost

Peter

(2004)

Multi-modal Process

ship entrance rapid speed and accuracy shipper and shipping

companies reactive operation flexibility

Interface labor and capital

Transport modes ship calls frequency and amount of fleet factors

28

And there are many experts and scholars research for the influence factors to

port selection and competitiveness in Korea The specific content follows table5

Table 312 Literature research in Korean academia

Influence factors

Jeon Il-su (1992) location facilities charges service level (EDI) terminal operation

port authority

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

( 1993 )

location facilities throughput charges service operation

situation

Kim Hak-so

(1993)

export shipping amount of annual cost of each ton of cargo

marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km of

cargo loading time

import marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km

of cargo amount of liner ship

Yeo Gi-tae (1996) location facilities throughput charge service operation situation

Ha Dong-u amp

Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

location facilities service level logistics charges environment of

logistics service

Yeo Gi-tae (1999) location facilities throughput charges service

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

throughput quay length yard area GNP

Kum Jong-su

(2001)

distance between port and cargo site terminal facilities service

the capacity of multi-transport capacity of cargo handling

administrative service rates and charges of inland transport

congestion

Yeo Gi-tae (2002) location throughput facilities service level

Kim Jin-gu (2002) port facilities location cargo amount rates and charges services

29

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005)

voyage degree to attract cargo cargo handling cost amount of

handling cargo connection to inland service reliability location

berth availability quay length feeder network depth

transshipment volumes cargo security profitability

offing degree to attract cargo berth availability cargo handling

cost transshipment volumes

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005)

cargo handling amount port facilities location rates and charges

level of service

Heo Yun-su

(2005)

port facilities rates and charges services marketing geopolitics

location economic and social circumstance

Kim Geun-seop

(2007)

port services facilities cargo handling amount location cost

productivity factor global factor

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) rates and charges services port characteristics

Many experts and scholars make a research on port selection and

competitiveness recently But the factors selection criteria are difference

Nevertheless the main factors are facilities services cost and so on

Therefore port competitiveness factors which chose in this study are port

facilities port services port rates and charges and social circumstance

However the main factors are not the whole factors any more more and more

detail factors and characteristic factors appearance Port selection and

competitiveness factors have changed And the development content is introduced

in next part

30

32 Port Competitiveness Development Tree

As mentioned above port facilities port rates and charges and port location are

the basic factors in the port selection and competitiveness

From the following table we can discover that first one facilities rates and

charges and location are the most important factor in port selection and

competitiveness second one the importance of social circumstance turns larger

inland connection is necessary all the time

Table 321 Main factor in the Pretentious Research

31

port facilities rates and

charges

inland

connection

social

circumstance location

French (1979) radic radic radic

Wiliingale (1982) radic radic

Slack (1985) radic

Pater (1990) radic radic

UNCTAD (1992) radic radic radic

Murphy(1992) radic

Jeon Il-su (1992) radic radic radic

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

(1993)

radic radic radic

Kim Hak-so

(1993) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1996) radic radic radic

Ha Dong-u

amp Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1998) radic radic radic

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

radic

Kum Jong-su

(2001) radic radic radic radic

Kim Jin-gu(2002) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(2002) radic radic

Lirn(2003-2004) radic radic radic

Pater(2004) radic

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005) radic radic radic

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005) radic radic radic

Heo Yun-su

(2005) radic radic radic radic

Kim Geun-seop

(2007) radic radic radic radic

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) radic

32

33 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green

Port Construction

Following the research above Port facilities rates and charges inland

connection and social circumstance are chose in this study port selection and

competitiveness department

e-RTGC Electric rubber tired gantry crane is a mobile gantry crane used for

stacking intermodal containers within the stacking areas of a container terminal

e-RTGC are used at container terminals and container storage yards to straddling

multiple lanes of railroad and container storage or when maximum storage

density in the container stack is desired

AMP is shorted for Alternative Marine Power and Itrsquos a facility which

provides the electric system in the land for ship which entry in the port The

facility can reduce emissions which ship get entrance in the port

AGV is a mobile robot that follows markers or wires in the floor or uses

vision or lasers They are most often used in industrial applications to move

materials around a manufacturing facility or a warehouse Automatic Guided

Vehicle systems work around-the-clock making continuous flow and just-in-time

delivery easier to achieve Application of the automatic guided vehicle has broade

33

ned during the late 20th century and they are no longer restricted to industrial

environments

The e-RTGC AMP and AGV are the new clean facilities and equipments in the

Green Port they donrsquot reduce the efficiency of handling cargo and they also

reduce the CO2 emission account

Green ship certification system if a ship utilizes clean and CO2 emission

reduction technology on the ship building adds equipment and management and

son on certification would be received And the port authority gives some

incentive and preferential treatment among 45 ports Such as a better schedule is

provided for green membership ship priority in handing cargo and discount on

entrance fee

Incentives on the new cleaning technology There are two expressions about

this measure one is that the port authority give a incentive to ship which have a

great utilization on the new cleaning technology and the other one is that

environment provide many incentives to the authority which utilize the new

cleaning technology in the port such as LED street lamp solar power cranes

Green flag The Green Flag incentive program was set up to encourage ships to

slow down in order to improve air quality The Green Flag program provides

approximately $2 million a year in discounts for vessel operators who slow their

ships to 12 knots (22kmh) or less within 20miles (32km) of the harbor

34

According to the Port the Green Flag program reduced air pollution by 600tons in

2007 and is expected to do better in 2008

All of Green ship certification system incentives on the new cleaning

technology and Green Flag are incentives provided for users of port and aimed at

reduce port rates and charges So the 3 measures belong to affect port rates and

charges

Eco-friendly transport means conversion Eco-friendly means of transport are

much accounted of green port for example railway discharge less GHG emission

than truck barge with a clean engine among the river and inshore canal

Joint distribution joint distribution is a collaborative system which port

provides among many logistics companies It can make the cargo handling speed

rapidly and reduce cargo storage time for CO2 emission reducing such as

refrigerated container In an addition it also makes the logistics companies

transport more efficient

Cost on amount of CO2 emission differenced from other port the cost on

amount of CO2 is included in the port cost The cost aims to reduce the CO2

emission directly

CO2 emission reduction policies compared with other traditional port Green

Port gives more cost discount and incentives but in an addition there are many

policies on CO2 emission restriction Such as aging trucks restrictions in inland

transport department ship entry speed reduced and fuel changed in the ship

35

department and so on Whether these restriction policies constrain port

development or not and the degree of these policies constrain port development

will be explain by the AHP results

Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors some ports in the

western countries are opened as a travel place for visitors so as to change the

polluted impress and raise the position in our heart

Cost on amount of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction policies and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors can affect the social

circumstance factor Whether these measures can or not improve the social

circumstance and port competitiveness we have to see the next calculation and

results

36

Chapter 4 The Green Port Competitiveness

Analysis

41 The Green Port Competitiveness Model by AHP

The AHP is one multi-criteria decision making method which has been

extensively applied to a variety of decision-making situations The multi-criteria

techniques are considered to be a promising framework for evaluation of

decision-making factors since they have the potential to take into account

conflicting multidimensional incommensurable and uncertain effects of

decisions explicitly

In order to apply the AHP method a hierarchical decision schema was

constructed by decomposing the decision problem into its decision elements

37

After that the importance or preferences of the decision elements are examined in

a pair-wise comparison to the elements in the hierarchy The parameters are

estimated using pair-wise comparisons between the importance of the attribute or

decision element in the function using data made by each responder Making

comparisons is a question of which of the two attributes is more import as well as

how much more important

Follow these theories the Green Port Competitiveness Model choose factors as

follow in port competitiveness factors part there are port facilities port rates and

charges inland connection social circumstance in Green Port construction part

there are e-RTGC AMP AGV green ship certification system green flag

incentives on the new cleaning technology eco-friendly transport means

conversion joint distribution CO2 emission reduction policies cost on amount of

CO2 emission beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

38

Figure 41 Green Port Competitiveness AHP model

Follow the Green Port Competitiveness AHP as shown we set a questionnaire

survey to many experts scholars working in logistics system area And we got 15

ones and 14 ones results are believable and integrated

42 Green Port Competitiveness Analysis

39

The key to construction of the factors which affects the port competitiveness

is to determine the conceptual model The selection of the factors directly affects

the evaluation of the result In order to ensure the accuracy objectivity and

practicality of evaluation results the following basic principles must be followed

when selecting factors systematic principles the principle of universal

comparability practical principle and goal-oriented principle In view of the

foregoing the competitiveness which affected by Green Port construction model

is made The analysis follows established principles of port competitiveness

evaluation taking into account the characteristics and functions of the port as well

as port facilities port services port rates and charges ship entrance inland

connection social circumstances and so on

(1) Port facilities

e-RTGC U11 AMP U12 AGV U13

(2) Port rates and charges

Green ship certification system U21 Incentives on the new clean

technology U22 Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

(3) Inland connection

Eco-friendly means of transport U31 Joint distribution U32

(4) Social circumstances

40

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41 CO2 emission reduction policies

U42 Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors U43

Table 421 Details of Level I and Level II values

Level I

indicators Symbol Level II indicators Symbol

Port facilities A1

e-RTGC U11

AMP U12

AGV U13

Port rates and

charges A2

Green ship certification system U21

Incentives on the new clean technology U22

Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

Inland

connection A3

Eco-friendly means of transport U31

Joint distribution U32

Social

circumstances A4

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41

CO2 emissions reduction policies U42

Beautiful environment construction in inner

harbors U43

41

I Determination of level I indicator weights

As the ports competitiveness evaluation indicators at this level are complex

and the elements are not easily quantified AHP is adopted to determine the

indicator weights with the basic steps as follows

(1) Establish a comparative judgment matrix The comparative judgment

matrix is obtained through comparing contributed proportion of multiple

indicators to the overall target by the judgment scale wherein the fuzzy

judgment number introduced is 1 3 5 7 and 9 and the reciprocal of

such number indicates the important degree of one element relatively to

another The results are shown in next table

Table 422 Comparison matrix of level I indicators

A1 A2 A3 A4

A1 1 15 13 3

A2 5 1 3 7

A3 3 13 1 5

A4 13 17 15 1

(2) Calculate the characteristic vector of the comparative judgment matrix

which refers to the weighted vector of the indicator The writer adopts

42

the geometric method to calculate the characteristic vector The

calculated result is as follows

ω=(012 0560 026 006)T λmax=418 It can be obtained from the table

RI=09 Wherein ω is the characteristic vector corresponding to the

maximum characteristic value λmax of the comparative judgment matrix

namely the weighted vector of the indicator RI is the average

consistency indicator as shown in following table

Table423 Average random consistency indicator RI

Matrix Order

RI

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

0 0 058 09 112 124 132 141

Matrix Order

RI

9 10 11 12 13 14 15

145 149 152 154 156 158 159

(3) Conduct consistency check on the comparative judgment matrix Adopt

the random consistency proportion CR to judge the consistency of the

comparative judgment matrix According to CI= (λmax -n)(n-1) and

CR=CIRI it can be obtained through calculation CR=007lt01 Thus

this comparative judgment matrix has a satisfactory consistency and the

indicator weight coefficient calculated through this matrix is acceptable

43

II Determination of level II indicator weights

The data at this level are the details of level Ⅰ indicator The judgment

matrix obtained through comparing multiple sub-indicators under Level Ⅰ

indicators is adopted to determine the weights of sub-indicators under each

indicator one by one The specific steps are as follows

(1) The experts score the weights within the given range To determine the

weights of several small indicators under the same big indicator it is

supposed that the score of small indicator ｋ under the indicator j made

by the expert i is Xijk wherein i=12n n is the total number of

experts ј=12m m is the total number of LevelⅡ indicator к

=12Oj Oj is the number of small indicators under the big indicator ј

іјк IJK LRC l I j k

(2) The credit rating of the expert і is l l =1 2 3 l =1 indicates this expert

is quite familiar with the evaluated contents l =2 indicator this expert is

44

with the evaluated contents l =3 indicates this expert is not quite familiar

with the evaluated contents yi1 is the=08 yi2 =05 and yi3=1

(3) The comprehensive evaluation score of small indicator l under the

indicator j is as follows

(4) The formula for normalization processing of indicator weights is as

follows and the absolute weight of the indicator set is marked as

q=(q1q2q11)

(5) Because of the same justification and principle we donrsquot give the detail

about the calculation The same with the level Ⅰ calculation we

manipulation data one by one and get 14 results And obtain the average

45

results by weighted average method The results detail as Table for the

final weights of Level-Ⅱ evaluation indicators

Above the calculation process and method are just one of data from the

questionable surveys In this study the final results are got from the

weighted average by the results of each questionable survey

The final results are shown as Table424

Table424 Indicator weights table of indicator system

Level I

indicators Weight LevelⅡ indicators

Relative

weight

Absolute

weight

Importance

percentage

Port Facilities

A1 02735

e-RTGC U11 05506 01506 1506

AMP U12 01648 00451 451

AGV U13 02826 00773 773

Port Rates and

Charges A2

02902

Green ship certification s

ystem U21 04724 01371 1371

Incentives on the new

clean technology U22 02871 00833 833

Green Flag (speed

reduction incentive)U23 02405 00698 698

Inland

connection A3

02865

Eco-friendly means of

transport U31 05942 01702 1702

Joint distribution U32 04058 01163 1163

Social

environmentA4 00863

Cost on amount of CO2

emission U41 03698 00319 319

CO2 emissions reduction

policies U42 02273 00196 196

Beautiful environment

construction in inner

harbors U43

04029 00348 348

46

III Case study

In the questionable survey we also got the mark of Green Port measures

evaluation value of many main ports such as Singapore Port Shanghai Port

Hongkong Port Busan Port LALB Port Rotterdam Port and Yocohama Port

The highest mark is 5 and lowest one is 1

Table425 Evaluation value of many main ports

Singapore

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

LALB

Port

Rotterdam

Port

Yocohama

Port

Port facilities 38000 36000 34000 38182 38000 42000 32000

Port rates and

charges 32000 36000 31000 35455 32000 39000 33000

Inland

connection 39000 34545 35000 29091 35000 45000 36000

Social

circumstance 42000 32727 41000 32000 38000 42727 36000

With the Green Port and Port competitiveness indicator weights results these

ports got the final evaluation value

47

Table426 Final evaluation value on main ports Green Port measures and

competitiveness

Rotterdam

Port

Singapore

Port

LALB

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

Yocohama

Port

394 345 330 330 319 318 317

43 Results Analysis

From the results table we can obtain the many results as following

① The main Green Port measures which are more important to improve port

competitiveness are Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system the indicator weights are 01702 01506 and

01371 among the 11 indicators

② In the Green Port construction Cost on amount of CO2 emission and CO2

emissions reduction policies are the restrictions indicators but the weight

of two indicators are not big 00319 and 00196 So effect on Green Port

construction to port competitiveness does have the weaken capacity but

not clearly strengthen more clearly Thus Green Port construction really

could improve the port competitiveness

48

③ In the case study traditional ports Rotterdam and Singapore Port give us

better examples on Green Port construction especially Rotterdam Port

④ Hongkong Busan and Yocohama Port all got a lower evaluation value

But in detail Hongkong and Yocohama Port got a lower on the port

facilities and rates and charges Busan Port got a higher on the port

facilities and rates and charges but a lower on the inland connection and

social circumstance

⑤ Shanghai Port doesnrsquot have Particular strength factors but the

comprehensive strength is not bad the same as LALB Port

49

Chapter 5 Conclusion

In this thesis the effects of Green Port construction for improving the port

competitiveness have been studied Under the definition of Green Port the

characteristics of Green Port and its effects has been shown by analysing the AHP

method which based on the questionary survey for Green Port specialists and port

officers

Follow the results of analysis on Green Port competitiveness AHP model

Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green ship certification system is

better for Green Port Construction welcome for shipping companies and citizens

who live around the port And in the analysis of Port competitiveness factors port

rates and charges always affects port competitiveness a lot As a trend inland

connection factor abstracts more attention of shipping companies

50

On the trend of port department each port should take a activity to adjust

strategy for improving its competitiveness Such as in the main ports evaluation

Busan port get a high value on port rates and charges and port facilities but as a

lower value on inland connection factor the final value is not as well as we look

forward In the evaluation of Singapore Port through it gets a lower value on rates

and charges higher value on inland connection and social circumstance causes the

final value are better So the Green Port Construction may be a trend in port

department

In the results of this thesis Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system are better solutions for Green Port Construction And

especially it can be verified that the port rates and charges always affects port

competitiveness Futhermore the investment for Green Port construction and its

effects have to be verified in the future

51

References

1 Hoyle B S and Smith J 1992 Transport and Development In Modern

transport geography edited by B S Hoyle R D Knowles (London Belhaven

Press)pp11-31

2 Beresford A K C De Souza A J R G and Pettit S J 2005 Stategic

development of liner shipping companies and terminal operators Ocean yearbook

19(Chicago 1L The University of Chicago Press) pp 732-750

3 Heaver T D 2002 Supply chain and logistics management implications for

liner shipping In The handbook of maritime economics and business edited by C

Grammenos (LondonLLP) pp 375-396

4 Park T E (2011) A Study on selection criteria of Green Port and evaluation of

major Korean port A masters thesis of graduate school of Incheon university

52

5 JeongBH (2009)Green port management policy directions in the green

growth era- The case of Gwangyang port in Republic of Korea Journal of Korea

Port Economic Association Vol25(3) p361-384

6 Lee J S Han N H(2009) A study on Green Port Revitalization According to

Air Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

7 Lee Y K Nan J W(2010)Green Logistics Policy Analysis and Implications

of Japan

8 Lee B S (2010)Tendency and Countermeasures on Green Logistics in Port

Logistics Company A masters thesis of graduate school of Korean Maritime

university

9 Lee J S (2009) A Study on Green Port Revitalization According to Air

Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

10 Zhang F Y Li Z Lu X J Yao X L(2008)Competitiveness of Inland

Ports Based on F-AHP

11 Port of Long Beach (2009) Green Port Policy wwwpolbcom

12 The port of Los Angeles wwwportoflosangelesorg

10

comprehensive and concrete So we have to understand the concept in the Green

Port Construction measures and programs There are about 4 kind explanation and

promotion programs in the Green Port Respectively the port which based on

green technology and green business creating new growth motive improving

living standards jumping in the ranks of the advanced port

ltFigure 2gt Green Port appearance and basic definition

In the Green Growth National Strategy Policy there are 10 pieces of policy

directions and 50 researches each department should choose the appropriate one

Follow these researches chose by port availability especially Low Carbon

11

Self-sufficiency Port The Disaster Safety Port Eco-friendly Port Resource

Recycling Port and in this study Green Port construction is a plan on

comprehensive and mix of 4kinds of Green Port Construction

Table 221 Four Promotions for Green Port Construction

Promotion Program

(Green Port type) Activities

Low-Carbon

Self-Sufficiency Port

Eco-friendly inland transportation system building

New renewable resources power equipment utilization

AMP LED utilization

The Disaster Safety

Port

Disaster Prevention environment infrastructure building

Disaster prediction and corresponding system utilization

Eco-Friendly Port Beauty the port by green park planting and so on

Provide eco-friendly port building programs

Resource Recycling

Port

Port waste (silt soil) effectively recycling system

Establish resource recycling port paragon

As table1 shown each type of Green Port has a separate emphasis

Eco-friendly inland transportation system which encourages utilizing rail canal

barge clean system reduces the truck application amount AMP means

Alternative Maritime Power supply system replaces with ship power generation

The Green Port construction in most of counties is the low-carbon self-sufficiency

12

port And in their construction maybe add a few other type promote director like

beauty the port by green park planting and so on

However in this study the Green Port concept is a comprehensive plan among

4 types not a specialization system

23 Green Port Construction Situation in major countries

After ltKyoto protocolgt having brought out each department began to take

affords on the reducing the GHG (greenhouse gas) emission In port department

the activities are embodied in the Green Port construction In this study many

major ports in US EU Japan and Korea are chose to explain for research

231 US

① LALB Port

In order to achieve to reduce marine pollutants standby and build clean port

LALB Port standby resource ministry and environment protection ministry

signed a 5year plan on clean standby action cooperation

This promotion business plan set a set of marine pollutants standby emission

limitation on the ship department from the statistics year 2006-2007 to 2010-2011

handling department heavy duty equipment truck department and so on Such as

13

in Green Port Technology construction department measures and programs are

shown in following Table

Table231 the details of LALB Port Green Port Promotion Programs

Promotion Program

Heavy Equipment Truck

Heavy Equipment

Replace and Update Aging Facilities

Substitute Fuels and Clean Fuel Incentives

Budgetary for the Development of Substitute Fuels

Marine Vessels Tugs

Ship Speed Reduction within the Port

Electrical supply of parking in the Berth

Use low-sulfur fuel (supplementary motor)

Handling Equipment

Air Quality Monitoring

Measure ambient air pollution levels in the vicinity of

the Port

Include a number of real-time air quality measurements

On the restrict situation of heavy equipment trucks and others vessels must to

be replaced and rebuilt in order to minimum the emission of NOx And the trucks

which donrsquot reach the regulate standard do not allowed to get in the port These

regulations will help their owner to replace and update trucks and also set up a

replacement plan to 16000 aging trucks make the replace done by 2012 As

foundation repaired the cargo owner must to pay an addition tax about 20ft 35$

40ft 79$

14

In the maritime department the speed reduction incentive took action in

Jan2005 When ship entry into the port boundary speed must be reduced under

20 miles 12kont At the beginning the effect of this plan is very clearly so the

limitation may be raised to 40mile And AMP (Alternative Maritime Power ) is

encouraged to be built and developed as to ship use their engine and get GHG

emission

② New York- New Jersey Port

The New York- New Jersey Port Authority brought out environment policy on

CO2 emission reduction The main concepts as following first reduce PX SOX

3 each year and CO2 5 Second ship must utilize sulfur-low fuel as a

obligation Third AMP is provided Forth modern the unloading and loading

equipment must be built Fifth promote trucks replacement Sixth reform the ship

engine Seventh invent 9 billion dollars in the following 10 years Eighth invent

to all hybrid equipment (325) Ninth install the hybrid truck in AMPT and

NYCT

③ Seattle Port

15

In Seattle Port Air Environment Maritime Improvement plan has been

accepted in 2005 The plan includes first set up Puget Sound Maritime Air

Forum and make one AMP provide services for two tour ships second change

the diesel hybrid equipment into electric utilization Third use bio-diesel and

diesel catalyst and reduce the emission Forth emphasize the standard and plan of

truck minimum the idling time

Seattle Port Tacoma Port and Vancouver made a assignment and promote

ldquoNorthwest Ports Clean Air Strategyrdquo

④ Auckland Port

Auckland Port set up the aging replacement plan in 2008 and invent 20 milion

dollars gas emission should reach the level And cargo transport system in port

hinterland port authority and Air environment management committee make

cooperation and give an incentive to truck which use new clean technology

Table232 Short term and Long term Green Port Plans in Auckland Port

16

17

232 EU

Rotterdam Port

As the biggest Port in EU Rotterdam Port takes more affords in reducing the

CO2 emission Main programs are low carbon footprint AMP and so on The

limitation of CO2 emission reduces down 50 of 1990 by 2025

In July 2008 the authority of Rotterdam port gave international cooperation

with other ports an extra boost by organizing the World Ports Climate Conference

During this conference the authority of Rotterdam discussed possible ways in

which ports and business could reduce air pollution and CO2 emissions The

proposals the authority of Rotterdam was set out in a declaration which was

supported by all 55 port cities attending the conference The conference resulted

in five projects to improve air quality and reduce CO2 emissions The authority of

Rotterdam is behind the project to further elaborate an Environmental Ship Index

The Rotterdam Climate Initiative is a joint venture with the municipality of

Rotterdam DCMR Environmental Protection Agency Rijnmond and Deltalinqs

Common goal is to halve CO2 emissions in the region by 2025 in comparison with

1990 levels In connection with the Rotterdam Climate Initiative the port works

on (together with DCMR and others) creating an infrastructure for the capture

18

transport and storage of CO2 A business case presented in the summer of 2008 is

now being elaborated into a business plan The business case concludes that

Rotterdam can begin in 2015 with the capture transport and underground storage

of five million tons of CO2 per annum This means that the basic infrastructure

will then be in place for further growth in capture and storage to twenty million

tons in 2025

In 2008 a start was made on the development of a sustainability index for

activities relating to the P for Planet (environment) In 2009 it will further expand

the index to cover the P for People and the P for Profit In the first phase of the

sustainability index CO2 footprint sustainable purchasing sustainable building

and sustainable land allocation will be covered

233 Japan

① Tacoma Port

In the Tacoma Port there are some programs on protecting the air water and

soil environment

In the air protection department ldquoNorthwest Ports Clean Air Strategyrdquo

ldquoGreen Gateway for Traderdquo and ldquoTruck Programrdquo had brought out to against air

pollution The concepts include using ultra-low sulfur diesel bio-diesel and other

cleaner-burning fuels in cargo-handling equipment using low-sulfur distillate

19

fuels at berth adding ldquogreen designrdquo environmental features to ships including

diesel-electric motors that save up to 30 percent in fuel and significantly reduce

emissions setting targets to change older less-efficient truck engines installing

anti-idling devices on rail-switching engines as well as partnering on other

innovative technological advance

The Port of Tacomarsquos four dockside rail yards move cargo quickly and

efficiently from container terminals They also reduce the number of trucks on

city streets and highways Each full train that leaves the Port represents 250 to 300

trucks not on our roads reducing roadway congestion and diesel emissions The

lowest emission route to ship cargo from Asia to the US Midwest is through the

Puget Sound according to the results of a study by Herbert Engineering released

in May 2009

And in the land protection program there are successful clean projects open

spaces and future habitat restoration In 2007 the Port purchased about 70 acres

of open space known as Juliarsquos Gulch and Storey Pit located between the

Tideflats and residential Northeast Tacoma Monitor water quality system is in

utilization in the water department in Tacoma Port

② Tokyo Port

In the Tokyo Port Green Port programs are almost similar with Tacoma Port

e-RTGC (Rubber Tired Gantry Crane) the barge between Tokyo and Yocohama

20

which shorten international maritime container cargo transportation land distance

super eco-shipbuilding technology dissemination and promotion green business

certification operation and shippers and logistics companies support cooperation

③ Osaka Port and Hakata Port

AMP electrical power equipment and solar power equipment are in utilization in

Osaka Port E-RTGC and solar power of refrigerated container are in utilization in

the Hakata Port

234 Korea

In Busan Port a set of Green Port took implementation such as LNG truck

E-RTGC equipment utilization eco-friendly transport means conversion (rail

canal barge) and GHG emission reduction obligation Table233

21

ltTable 233gt Summary of the Main Port of Green Port Measures

COUNTRY PORT MEASURES

US

LALB Port

Green flag AMP discharge gas reduction obligation

recommends use of alternative fuels and clean fuel

funding for the development of alternative fuels facilities

by new engine development instead of NOx emissions

green truck program (reduce70-80) low-sulfur fuel

utilization restore and revitalize the Los Cerritos

Wetlands

New York

Port

AMP modernized facilities utilization high speed hybrid

yard

Auckland

Port

Incentives on the new cleaning technology containers

transportation system

Seattle Port

AMP green ship membership Tier 4 level reducing PM

by 1994 level Smart Way program Northwest Ports

Clean Air Strategy

EU Rotterdam

Port

Clean engine (barge) green ship membership carbon

footprint calculation cruise ship which under port

authority change to use low-sulfur fuel low emission

engine development and utilization Green Award AMP

ship recycling incentives

Japan

Tokyo Port

RTGC (Rubber Tired Gantry Crane) apply for the barge

between Tokyo and Yocohama shorten international

maritime container cargo transportation land distance

super eco-shipbuilding technology dissemination and

promotion green business certification operation

shippers and logistics companies support cooperation

Osaka Port AMP electrical power equipment solar power equipment

Hakata Port E-RTGC solar power utilization in refrigerated container

Korea Busan Port

LNG truck E-RTGC eco-friendly transport means

conversion (rail canal barge) GHG emission reduction

obligation

22

24 Green Port Indicators Research

As the previous section list shown Green Port measures and programs are

substantially the same

When a ship entry in the port boundary from voyage many ports give a

incentive on shifting and utilizing sulfur-low fuel and reducing the speed under

20 miles when the ship berth in the port the alternative maritime power are

provided which replace its power generation

Next in the cargo unloading and loading department the same with above

utilization of sulfur-low fuel and electrical equipment are promoted and

eco-driving education to driver is necessary what speed is fuel fully burning and

emission minimum point

In the cargo transport department in other words truck department the

replacement on aging trucks is popular in many ports aging trucks are prohibited

close to port at the same time an incentive or support function are provided on

aging replacement The automated equipments are recommended to utilize in the

Green Port like hybrid yard tractor And a perfect plan on truck running also could

reduce the idling time and against the emission of CO2

The details reference the following Table 241

23

Table241 Green Port measures in port each department

Emission reduction programs

Ship

department

Shipping

in the

port

boundary

Obligation on the utilization of sulfur-low fuel

Reform ship engine and utilize hybrid

Speed reduce in the port entrance(a off-shore fee

incentive)

Off-shore AMP

Shift utilization system of clean fuel

Unloading and loading

department

Obligation on the utilization of sulfur-low fuel

Replace electrical equipment

Eco-driving

Truck department Hybrid yard tractor utilization

Promote aging truck replacement

Minimum the idling time

Others LED light in the Port

Develop renew and recycle resource energy

The Green Port measures in this study are e-RTGC AMP AGV Green Ship

certification system incentives on the new clean technology Green Flag(speed

reduction incentive)eco-friendly transport means conversion joint distribution

the cost on account of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction polities and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

The details and definition on each Green Port measure and the relationship with

Port Competitiveness will be expressed in next chapter

24

Chapter 3 The Relationship between Port

Competitiveness and Green Port Construction

31 Port Competitiveness Literature Review

Although past studies on port selection models have focused on port selection

made by port facilities port services port rates and charge and location

Murphy made a survey between 534 shipping companies and port authorities in

1989 and between 1850 shipping companies and port authorities in 1992

Comparing with other papers Murphys got a survey among more widely

objects In his paper port selection(port competitiveness) was seen to affected by

facilities situation appropriate pilotage max ship entrance probability the

25

capability of handling non-regular cargos whether to provide information of ship

nationality or not and port services level

In French model (1979) there are two factors affecting the port selection (port

competitiveness) endogenous factor and exogenous factor In endogenous factors

there are adequacy and physical plant condition of terminal facilities terminal rate

and charges frequency and geographic coverage of ship and freight services the

capacity of connecting to inland rails or transport net and the services provides for

the shipping or logistics And exogenous factors included the size and economic

capacity of hinterland as a source exports or market for imports national

economic situation trade policy and support established by government the

situation at home and abroad

The same as Frenchs paper in Paters paper in 1990 there are endogenous and

exogenous factors too In endogenous there are the services provides for the

shipping or logistics capacity of terminal facilities situation and condition of

facilities operation strategies established by port authority convenience to utilize

And the political situation at home and abroad social change economic factor

stabilized labor and capital However in 2004 there is a tremendous change in

Peters new paper There are four parts multi-modal process interface transport

modes infrastructure Multi-model Process part includes ship entrance rapid

speed and accuracy shipper and shipping companies reactive operation flexibility

Interface includes labor power information technology and so on And there are

26

ship calls frequency and amount of fleet factors in the transport modes part In the

infrastructure part includes port facility equipments and so on

Port facilities rates and charges services inland situation and social

circumstance factors affect the port selection and competitiveness a lot from the

research until 1992 by Murphy And in Lirn and Pater research 2003-2004 the

new and detail factors are shown to us

We can clearly see the contents in next table

27

Table 311 Prevention literature research results

Influence factors

French

(1979)

Endogenous

port facilities port rate and charges calls frequency port services

port connection with inland

Exogenous

economic size of hinterland national economic situation trade

policy home and abroad situation

Willingale

(1982)

voyage distance economy size entrance to port and route port

facilities max ship entrance probability port operation rates and

charges port authority scale of port

Slack

(1985)

cost of inland transportation port proximity ship demurrage

multi-transport

Peter

(1990)

Endogenous

port facilities condition of facilities operation strategies

convenience to utilize

Exogenous

political situation social change economic factor stabilized labor

and capital

UNCTAD

(1992)

port facilities services location level of financial industry

information communication system social circumstances economic

stability

Murphy

(1992)

facilities situation appropriate pilotage max ship entrance

probability the capability of handling non-regular cargos whether to

provide information of ship nationality or not port services level

Lirn

(2003-2004)

physical and technologic facilities geopolitical location port

operation and management shipping and terminal cost

Peter

(2004)

Multi-modal Process

ship entrance rapid speed and accuracy shipper and shipping

companies reactive operation flexibility

Interface labor and capital

Transport modes ship calls frequency and amount of fleet factors

28

And there are many experts and scholars research for the influence factors to

port selection and competitiveness in Korea The specific content follows table5

Table 312 Literature research in Korean academia

Influence factors

Jeon Il-su (1992) location facilities charges service level (EDI) terminal operation

port authority

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

( 1993 )

location facilities throughput charges service operation

situation

Kim Hak-so

(1993)

export shipping amount of annual cost of each ton of cargo

marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km of

cargo loading time

import marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km

of cargo amount of liner ship

Yeo Gi-tae (1996) location facilities throughput charge service operation situation

Ha Dong-u amp

Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

location facilities service level logistics charges environment of

logistics service

Yeo Gi-tae (1999) location facilities throughput charges service

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

throughput quay length yard area GNP

Kum Jong-su

(2001)

distance between port and cargo site terminal facilities service

the capacity of multi-transport capacity of cargo handling

administrative service rates and charges of inland transport

congestion

Yeo Gi-tae (2002) location throughput facilities service level

Kim Jin-gu (2002) port facilities location cargo amount rates and charges services

29

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005)

voyage degree to attract cargo cargo handling cost amount of

handling cargo connection to inland service reliability location

berth availability quay length feeder network depth

transshipment volumes cargo security profitability

offing degree to attract cargo berth availability cargo handling

cost transshipment volumes

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005)

cargo handling amount port facilities location rates and charges

level of service

Heo Yun-su

(2005)

port facilities rates and charges services marketing geopolitics

location economic and social circumstance

Kim Geun-seop

(2007)

port services facilities cargo handling amount location cost

productivity factor global factor

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) rates and charges services port characteristics

Many experts and scholars make a research on port selection and

competitiveness recently But the factors selection criteria are difference

Nevertheless the main factors are facilities services cost and so on

Therefore port competitiveness factors which chose in this study are port

facilities port services port rates and charges and social circumstance

However the main factors are not the whole factors any more more and more

detail factors and characteristic factors appearance Port selection and

competitiveness factors have changed And the development content is introduced

in next part

30

32 Port Competitiveness Development Tree

As mentioned above port facilities port rates and charges and port location are

the basic factors in the port selection and competitiveness

From the following table we can discover that first one facilities rates and

charges and location are the most important factor in port selection and

competitiveness second one the importance of social circumstance turns larger

inland connection is necessary all the time

Table 321 Main factor in the Pretentious Research

31

port facilities rates and

charges

inland

connection

social

circumstance location

French (1979) radic radic radic

Wiliingale (1982) radic radic

Slack (1985) radic

Pater (1990) radic radic

UNCTAD (1992) radic radic radic

Murphy(1992) radic

Jeon Il-su (1992) radic radic radic

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

(1993)

radic radic radic

Kim Hak-so

(1993) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1996) radic radic radic

Ha Dong-u

amp Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1998) radic radic radic

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

radic

Kum Jong-su

(2001) radic radic radic radic

Kim Jin-gu(2002) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(2002) radic radic

Lirn(2003-2004) radic radic radic

Pater(2004) radic

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005) radic radic radic

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005) radic radic radic

Heo Yun-su

(2005) radic radic radic radic

Kim Geun-seop

(2007) radic radic radic radic

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) radic

32

33 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green

Port Construction

Following the research above Port facilities rates and charges inland

connection and social circumstance are chose in this study port selection and

competitiveness department

e-RTGC Electric rubber tired gantry crane is a mobile gantry crane used for

stacking intermodal containers within the stacking areas of a container terminal

e-RTGC are used at container terminals and container storage yards to straddling

multiple lanes of railroad and container storage or when maximum storage

density in the container stack is desired

AMP is shorted for Alternative Marine Power and Itrsquos a facility which

provides the electric system in the land for ship which entry in the port The

facility can reduce emissions which ship get entrance in the port

AGV is a mobile robot that follows markers or wires in the floor or uses

vision or lasers They are most often used in industrial applications to move

materials around a manufacturing facility or a warehouse Automatic Guided

Vehicle systems work around-the-clock making continuous flow and just-in-time

delivery easier to achieve Application of the automatic guided vehicle has broade

33

ned during the late 20th century and they are no longer restricted to industrial

environments

The e-RTGC AMP and AGV are the new clean facilities and equipments in the

Green Port they donrsquot reduce the efficiency of handling cargo and they also

reduce the CO2 emission account

Green ship certification system if a ship utilizes clean and CO2 emission

reduction technology on the ship building adds equipment and management and

son on certification would be received And the port authority gives some

incentive and preferential treatment among 45 ports Such as a better schedule is

provided for green membership ship priority in handing cargo and discount on

entrance fee

Incentives on the new cleaning technology There are two expressions about

this measure one is that the port authority give a incentive to ship which have a

great utilization on the new cleaning technology and the other one is that

environment provide many incentives to the authority which utilize the new

cleaning technology in the port such as LED street lamp solar power cranes

Green flag The Green Flag incentive program was set up to encourage ships to

slow down in order to improve air quality The Green Flag program provides

approximately $2 million a year in discounts for vessel operators who slow their

ships to 12 knots (22kmh) or less within 20miles (32km) of the harbor

34

According to the Port the Green Flag program reduced air pollution by 600tons in

2007 and is expected to do better in 2008

All of Green ship certification system incentives on the new cleaning

technology and Green Flag are incentives provided for users of port and aimed at

reduce port rates and charges So the 3 measures belong to affect port rates and

charges

Eco-friendly transport means conversion Eco-friendly means of transport are

much accounted of green port for example railway discharge less GHG emission

than truck barge with a clean engine among the river and inshore canal

Joint distribution joint distribution is a collaborative system which port

provides among many logistics companies It can make the cargo handling speed

rapidly and reduce cargo storage time for CO2 emission reducing such as

refrigerated container In an addition it also makes the logistics companies

transport more efficient

Cost on amount of CO2 emission differenced from other port the cost on

amount of CO2 is included in the port cost The cost aims to reduce the CO2

emission directly

CO2 emission reduction policies compared with other traditional port Green

Port gives more cost discount and incentives but in an addition there are many

policies on CO2 emission restriction Such as aging trucks restrictions in inland

transport department ship entry speed reduced and fuel changed in the ship

35

department and so on Whether these restriction policies constrain port

development or not and the degree of these policies constrain port development

will be explain by the AHP results

Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors some ports in the

western countries are opened as a travel place for visitors so as to change the

polluted impress and raise the position in our heart

Cost on amount of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction policies and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors can affect the social

circumstance factor Whether these measures can or not improve the social

circumstance and port competitiveness we have to see the next calculation and

results

36

Chapter 4 The Green Port Competitiveness

Analysis

41 The Green Port Competitiveness Model by AHP

The AHP is one multi-criteria decision making method which has been

extensively applied to a variety of decision-making situations The multi-criteria

techniques are considered to be a promising framework for evaluation of

decision-making factors since they have the potential to take into account

conflicting multidimensional incommensurable and uncertain effects of

decisions explicitly

In order to apply the AHP method a hierarchical decision schema was

constructed by decomposing the decision problem into its decision elements

37

After that the importance or preferences of the decision elements are examined in

a pair-wise comparison to the elements in the hierarchy The parameters are

estimated using pair-wise comparisons between the importance of the attribute or

decision element in the function using data made by each responder Making

comparisons is a question of which of the two attributes is more import as well as

how much more important

Follow these theories the Green Port Competitiveness Model choose factors as

follow in port competitiveness factors part there are port facilities port rates and

charges inland connection social circumstance in Green Port construction part

there are e-RTGC AMP AGV green ship certification system green flag

incentives on the new cleaning technology eco-friendly transport means

conversion joint distribution CO2 emission reduction policies cost on amount of

CO2 emission beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

38

Figure 41 Green Port Competitiveness AHP model

Follow the Green Port Competitiveness AHP as shown we set a questionnaire

survey to many experts scholars working in logistics system area And we got 15

ones and 14 ones results are believable and integrated

42 Green Port Competitiveness Analysis

39

The key to construction of the factors which affects the port competitiveness

is to determine the conceptual model The selection of the factors directly affects

the evaluation of the result In order to ensure the accuracy objectivity and

practicality of evaluation results the following basic principles must be followed

when selecting factors systematic principles the principle of universal

comparability practical principle and goal-oriented principle In view of the

foregoing the competitiveness which affected by Green Port construction model

is made The analysis follows established principles of port competitiveness

evaluation taking into account the characteristics and functions of the port as well

as port facilities port services port rates and charges ship entrance inland

connection social circumstances and so on

(1) Port facilities

e-RTGC U11 AMP U12 AGV U13

(2) Port rates and charges

Green ship certification system U21 Incentives on the new clean

technology U22 Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

(3) Inland connection

Eco-friendly means of transport U31 Joint distribution U32

(4) Social circumstances

40

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41 CO2 emission reduction policies

U42 Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors U43

Table 421 Details of Level I and Level II values

Level I

indicators Symbol Level II indicators Symbol

Port facilities A1

e-RTGC U11

AMP U12

AGV U13

Port rates and

charges A2

Green ship certification system U21

Incentives on the new clean technology U22

Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

Inland

connection A3

Eco-friendly means of transport U31

Joint distribution U32

Social

circumstances A4

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41

CO2 emissions reduction policies U42

Beautiful environment construction in inner

harbors U43

41

I Determination of level I indicator weights

As the ports competitiveness evaluation indicators at this level are complex

and the elements are not easily quantified AHP is adopted to determine the

indicator weights with the basic steps as follows

(1) Establish a comparative judgment matrix The comparative judgment

matrix is obtained through comparing contributed proportion of multiple

indicators to the overall target by the judgment scale wherein the fuzzy

judgment number introduced is 1 3 5 7 and 9 and the reciprocal of

such number indicates the important degree of one element relatively to

another The results are shown in next table

Table 422 Comparison matrix of level I indicators

A1 A2 A3 A4

A1 1 15 13 3

A2 5 1 3 7

A3 3 13 1 5

A4 13 17 15 1

(2) Calculate the characteristic vector of the comparative judgment matrix

which refers to the weighted vector of the indicator The writer adopts

42

the geometric method to calculate the characteristic vector The

calculated result is as follows

ω=(012 0560 026 006)T λmax=418 It can be obtained from the table

RI=09 Wherein ω is the characteristic vector corresponding to the

maximum characteristic value λmax of the comparative judgment matrix

namely the weighted vector of the indicator RI is the average

consistency indicator as shown in following table

Table423 Average random consistency indicator RI

Matrix Order

RI

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

0 0 058 09 112 124 132 141

Matrix Order

RI

9 10 11 12 13 14 15

145 149 152 154 156 158 159

(3) Conduct consistency check on the comparative judgment matrix Adopt

the random consistency proportion CR to judge the consistency of the

comparative judgment matrix According to CI= (λmax -n)(n-1) and

CR=CIRI it can be obtained through calculation CR=007lt01 Thus

this comparative judgment matrix has a satisfactory consistency and the

indicator weight coefficient calculated through this matrix is acceptable

43

II Determination of level II indicator weights

The data at this level are the details of level Ⅰ indicator The judgment

matrix obtained through comparing multiple sub-indicators under Level Ⅰ

indicators is adopted to determine the weights of sub-indicators under each

indicator one by one The specific steps are as follows

(1) The experts score the weights within the given range To determine the

weights of several small indicators under the same big indicator it is

supposed that the score of small indicator ｋ under the indicator j made

by the expert i is Xijk wherein i=12n n is the total number of

experts ј=12m m is the total number of LevelⅡ indicator к

=12Oj Oj is the number of small indicators under the big indicator ј

іјк IJK LRC l I j k

(2) The credit rating of the expert і is l l =1 2 3 l =1 indicates this expert

is quite familiar with the evaluated contents l =2 indicator this expert is

44

with the evaluated contents l =3 indicates this expert is not quite familiar

with the evaluated contents yi1 is the=08 yi2 =05 and yi3=1

(3) The comprehensive evaluation score of small indicator l under the

indicator j is as follows

(4) The formula for normalization processing of indicator weights is as

follows and the absolute weight of the indicator set is marked as

q=(q1q2q11)

(5) Because of the same justification and principle we donrsquot give the detail

about the calculation The same with the level Ⅰ calculation we

manipulation data one by one and get 14 results And obtain the average

45

results by weighted average method The results detail as Table for the

final weights of Level-Ⅱ evaluation indicators

Above the calculation process and method are just one of data from the

questionable surveys In this study the final results are got from the

weighted average by the results of each questionable survey

The final results are shown as Table424

Table424 Indicator weights table of indicator system

Level I

indicators Weight LevelⅡ indicators

Relative

weight

Absolute

weight

Importance

percentage

Port Facilities

A1 02735

e-RTGC U11 05506 01506 1506

AMP U12 01648 00451 451

AGV U13 02826 00773 773

Port Rates and

Charges A2

02902

Green ship certification s

ystem U21 04724 01371 1371

Incentives on the new

clean technology U22 02871 00833 833

Green Flag (speed

reduction incentive)U23 02405 00698 698

Inland

connection A3

02865

Eco-friendly means of

transport U31 05942 01702 1702

Joint distribution U32 04058 01163 1163

Social

environmentA4 00863

Cost on amount of CO2

emission U41 03698 00319 319

CO2 emissions reduction

policies U42 02273 00196 196

Beautiful environment

construction in inner

harbors U43

04029 00348 348

46

III Case study

In the questionable survey we also got the mark of Green Port measures

evaluation value of many main ports such as Singapore Port Shanghai Port

Hongkong Port Busan Port LALB Port Rotterdam Port and Yocohama Port

The highest mark is 5 and lowest one is 1

Table425 Evaluation value of many main ports

Singapore

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

LALB

Port

Rotterdam

Port

Yocohama

Port

Port facilities 38000 36000 34000 38182 38000 42000 32000

Port rates and

charges 32000 36000 31000 35455 32000 39000 33000

Inland

connection 39000 34545 35000 29091 35000 45000 36000

Social

circumstance 42000 32727 41000 32000 38000 42727 36000

With the Green Port and Port competitiveness indicator weights results these

ports got the final evaluation value

47

Table426 Final evaluation value on main ports Green Port measures and

competitiveness

Rotterdam

Port

Singapore

Port

LALB

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

Yocohama

Port

394 345 330 330 319 318 317

43 Results Analysis

From the results table we can obtain the many results as following

① The main Green Port measures which are more important to improve port

competitiveness are Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system the indicator weights are 01702 01506 and

01371 among the 11 indicators

② In the Green Port construction Cost on amount of CO2 emission and CO2

emissions reduction policies are the restrictions indicators but the weight

of two indicators are not big 00319 and 00196 So effect on Green Port

construction to port competitiveness does have the weaken capacity but

not clearly strengthen more clearly Thus Green Port construction really

could improve the port competitiveness

48

③ In the case study traditional ports Rotterdam and Singapore Port give us

better examples on Green Port construction especially Rotterdam Port

④ Hongkong Busan and Yocohama Port all got a lower evaluation value

But in detail Hongkong and Yocohama Port got a lower on the port

facilities and rates and charges Busan Port got a higher on the port

facilities and rates and charges but a lower on the inland connection and

social circumstance

⑤ Shanghai Port doesnrsquot have Particular strength factors but the

comprehensive strength is not bad the same as LALB Port

49

Chapter 5 Conclusion

In this thesis the effects of Green Port construction for improving the port

competitiveness have been studied Under the definition of Green Port the

characteristics of Green Port and its effects has been shown by analysing the AHP

method which based on the questionary survey for Green Port specialists and port

officers

Follow the results of analysis on Green Port competitiveness AHP model

Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green ship certification system is

better for Green Port Construction welcome for shipping companies and citizens

who live around the port And in the analysis of Port competitiveness factors port

rates and charges always affects port competitiveness a lot As a trend inland

connection factor abstracts more attention of shipping companies

50

On the trend of port department each port should take a activity to adjust

strategy for improving its competitiveness Such as in the main ports evaluation

Busan port get a high value on port rates and charges and port facilities but as a

lower value on inland connection factor the final value is not as well as we look

forward In the evaluation of Singapore Port through it gets a lower value on rates

and charges higher value on inland connection and social circumstance causes the

final value are better So the Green Port Construction may be a trend in port

department

In the results of this thesis Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system are better solutions for Green Port Construction And

especially it can be verified that the port rates and charges always affects port

competitiveness Futhermore the investment for Green Port construction and its

effects have to be verified in the future

51

References

1 Hoyle B S and Smith J 1992 Transport and Development In Modern

transport geography edited by B S Hoyle R D Knowles (London Belhaven

Press)pp11-31

2 Beresford A K C De Souza A J R G and Pettit S J 2005 Stategic

development of liner shipping companies and terminal operators Ocean yearbook

19(Chicago 1L The University of Chicago Press) pp 732-750

3 Heaver T D 2002 Supply chain and logistics management implications for

liner shipping In The handbook of maritime economics and business edited by C

Grammenos (LondonLLP) pp 375-396

4 Park T E (2011) A Study on selection criteria of Green Port and evaluation of

major Korean port A masters thesis of graduate school of Incheon university

52

5 JeongBH (2009)Green port management policy directions in the green

growth era- The case of Gwangyang port in Republic of Korea Journal of Korea

Port Economic Association Vol25(3) p361-384

6 Lee J S Han N H(2009) A study on Green Port Revitalization According to

Air Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

7 Lee Y K Nan J W(2010)Green Logistics Policy Analysis and Implications

of Japan

8 Lee B S (2010)Tendency and Countermeasures on Green Logistics in Port

Logistics Company A masters thesis of graduate school of Korean Maritime

university

9 Lee J S (2009) A Study on Green Port Revitalization According to Air

Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

10 Zhang F Y Li Z Lu X J Yao X L(2008)Competitiveness of Inland

Ports Based on F-AHP

11 Port of Long Beach (2009) Green Port Policy wwwpolbcom

12 The port of Los Angeles wwwportoflosangelesorg

11

Self-sufficiency Port The Disaster Safety Port Eco-friendly Port Resource

Recycling Port and in this study Green Port construction is a plan on

comprehensive and mix of 4kinds of Green Port Construction

Table 221 Four Promotions for Green Port Construction

Promotion Program

(Green Port type) Activities

Low-Carbon

Self-Sufficiency Port

Eco-friendly inland transportation system building

New renewable resources power equipment utilization

AMP LED utilization

The Disaster Safety

Port

Disaster Prevention environment infrastructure building

Disaster prediction and corresponding system utilization

Eco-Friendly Port Beauty the port by green park planting and so on

Provide eco-friendly port building programs

Resource Recycling

Port

Port waste (silt soil) effectively recycling system

Establish resource recycling port paragon

As table1 shown each type of Green Port has a separate emphasis

Eco-friendly inland transportation system which encourages utilizing rail canal

barge clean system reduces the truck application amount AMP means

Alternative Maritime Power supply system replaces with ship power generation

The Green Port construction in most of counties is the low-carbon self-sufficiency

12

port And in their construction maybe add a few other type promote director like

beauty the port by green park planting and so on

However in this study the Green Port concept is a comprehensive plan among

4 types not a specialization system

23 Green Port Construction Situation in major countries

After ltKyoto protocolgt having brought out each department began to take

affords on the reducing the GHG (greenhouse gas) emission In port department

the activities are embodied in the Green Port construction In this study many

major ports in US EU Japan and Korea are chose to explain for research

231 US

① LALB Port

In order to achieve to reduce marine pollutants standby and build clean port

LALB Port standby resource ministry and environment protection ministry

signed a 5year plan on clean standby action cooperation

This promotion business plan set a set of marine pollutants standby emission

limitation on the ship department from the statistics year 2006-2007 to 2010-2011

handling department heavy duty equipment truck department and so on Such as

13

in Green Port Technology construction department measures and programs are

shown in following Table

Table231 the details of LALB Port Green Port Promotion Programs

Promotion Program

Heavy Equipment Truck

Heavy Equipment

Replace and Update Aging Facilities

Substitute Fuels and Clean Fuel Incentives

Budgetary for the Development of Substitute Fuels

Marine Vessels Tugs

Ship Speed Reduction within the Port

Electrical supply of parking in the Berth

Use low-sulfur fuel (supplementary motor)

Handling Equipment

Air Quality Monitoring

Measure ambient air pollution levels in the vicinity of

the Port

Include a number of real-time air quality measurements

On the restrict situation of heavy equipment trucks and others vessels must to

be replaced and rebuilt in order to minimum the emission of NOx And the trucks

which donrsquot reach the regulate standard do not allowed to get in the port These

regulations will help their owner to replace and update trucks and also set up a

replacement plan to 16000 aging trucks make the replace done by 2012 As

foundation repaired the cargo owner must to pay an addition tax about 20ft 35$

40ft 79$

14

In the maritime department the speed reduction incentive took action in

Jan2005 When ship entry into the port boundary speed must be reduced under

20 miles 12kont At the beginning the effect of this plan is very clearly so the

limitation may be raised to 40mile And AMP (Alternative Maritime Power ) is

encouraged to be built and developed as to ship use their engine and get GHG

emission

② New York- New Jersey Port

The New York- New Jersey Port Authority brought out environment policy on

CO2 emission reduction The main concepts as following first reduce PX SOX

3 each year and CO2 5 Second ship must utilize sulfur-low fuel as a

obligation Third AMP is provided Forth modern the unloading and loading

equipment must be built Fifth promote trucks replacement Sixth reform the ship

engine Seventh invent 9 billion dollars in the following 10 years Eighth invent

to all hybrid equipment (325) Ninth install the hybrid truck in AMPT and

NYCT

③ Seattle Port

15

In Seattle Port Air Environment Maritime Improvement plan has been

accepted in 2005 The plan includes first set up Puget Sound Maritime Air

Forum and make one AMP provide services for two tour ships second change

the diesel hybrid equipment into electric utilization Third use bio-diesel and

diesel catalyst and reduce the emission Forth emphasize the standard and plan of

truck minimum the idling time

Seattle Port Tacoma Port and Vancouver made a assignment and promote

ldquoNorthwest Ports Clean Air Strategyrdquo

④ Auckland Port

Auckland Port set up the aging replacement plan in 2008 and invent 20 milion

dollars gas emission should reach the level And cargo transport system in port

hinterland port authority and Air environment management committee make

cooperation and give an incentive to truck which use new clean technology

Table232 Short term and Long term Green Port Plans in Auckland Port

16

17

232 EU

Rotterdam Port

As the biggest Port in EU Rotterdam Port takes more affords in reducing the

CO2 emission Main programs are low carbon footprint AMP and so on The

limitation of CO2 emission reduces down 50 of 1990 by 2025

In July 2008 the authority of Rotterdam port gave international cooperation

with other ports an extra boost by organizing the World Ports Climate Conference

During this conference the authority of Rotterdam discussed possible ways in

which ports and business could reduce air pollution and CO2 emissions The

proposals the authority of Rotterdam was set out in a declaration which was

supported by all 55 port cities attending the conference The conference resulted

in five projects to improve air quality and reduce CO2 emissions The authority of

Rotterdam is behind the project to further elaborate an Environmental Ship Index

The Rotterdam Climate Initiative is a joint venture with the municipality of

Rotterdam DCMR Environmental Protection Agency Rijnmond and Deltalinqs

Common goal is to halve CO2 emissions in the region by 2025 in comparison with

1990 levels In connection with the Rotterdam Climate Initiative the port works

on (together with DCMR and others) creating an infrastructure for the capture

18

transport and storage of CO2 A business case presented in the summer of 2008 is

now being elaborated into a business plan The business case concludes that

Rotterdam can begin in 2015 with the capture transport and underground storage

of five million tons of CO2 per annum This means that the basic infrastructure

will then be in place for further growth in capture and storage to twenty million

tons in 2025

In 2008 a start was made on the development of a sustainability index for

activities relating to the P for Planet (environment) In 2009 it will further expand

the index to cover the P for People and the P for Profit In the first phase of the

sustainability index CO2 footprint sustainable purchasing sustainable building

and sustainable land allocation will be covered

233 Japan

① Tacoma Port

In the Tacoma Port there are some programs on protecting the air water and

soil environment

In the air protection department ldquoNorthwest Ports Clean Air Strategyrdquo

ldquoGreen Gateway for Traderdquo and ldquoTruck Programrdquo had brought out to against air

pollution The concepts include using ultra-low sulfur diesel bio-diesel and other

cleaner-burning fuels in cargo-handling equipment using low-sulfur distillate

19

fuels at berth adding ldquogreen designrdquo environmental features to ships including

diesel-electric motors that save up to 30 percent in fuel and significantly reduce

emissions setting targets to change older less-efficient truck engines installing

anti-idling devices on rail-switching engines as well as partnering on other

innovative technological advance

The Port of Tacomarsquos four dockside rail yards move cargo quickly and

efficiently from container terminals They also reduce the number of trucks on

city streets and highways Each full train that leaves the Port represents 250 to 300

trucks not on our roads reducing roadway congestion and diesel emissions The

lowest emission route to ship cargo from Asia to the US Midwest is through the

Puget Sound according to the results of a study by Herbert Engineering released

in May 2009

And in the land protection program there are successful clean projects open

spaces and future habitat restoration In 2007 the Port purchased about 70 acres

of open space known as Juliarsquos Gulch and Storey Pit located between the

Tideflats and residential Northeast Tacoma Monitor water quality system is in

utilization in the water department in Tacoma Port

② Tokyo Port

In the Tokyo Port Green Port programs are almost similar with Tacoma Port

e-RTGC (Rubber Tired Gantry Crane) the barge between Tokyo and Yocohama

20

which shorten international maritime container cargo transportation land distance

super eco-shipbuilding technology dissemination and promotion green business

certification operation and shippers and logistics companies support cooperation

③ Osaka Port and Hakata Port

AMP electrical power equipment and solar power equipment are in utilization in

Osaka Port E-RTGC and solar power of refrigerated container are in utilization in

the Hakata Port

234 Korea

In Busan Port a set of Green Port took implementation such as LNG truck

E-RTGC equipment utilization eco-friendly transport means conversion (rail

canal barge) and GHG emission reduction obligation Table233

21

ltTable 233gt Summary of the Main Port of Green Port Measures

COUNTRY PORT MEASURES

US

LALB Port

Green flag AMP discharge gas reduction obligation

recommends use of alternative fuels and clean fuel

funding for the development of alternative fuels facilities

by new engine development instead of NOx emissions

green truck program (reduce70-80) low-sulfur fuel

utilization restore and revitalize the Los Cerritos

Wetlands

New York

Port

AMP modernized facilities utilization high speed hybrid

yard

Auckland

Port

Incentives on the new cleaning technology containers

transportation system

Seattle Port

AMP green ship membership Tier 4 level reducing PM

by 1994 level Smart Way program Northwest Ports

Clean Air Strategy

EU Rotterdam

Port

Clean engine (barge) green ship membership carbon

footprint calculation cruise ship which under port

authority change to use low-sulfur fuel low emission

engine development and utilization Green Award AMP

ship recycling incentives

Japan

Tokyo Port

RTGC (Rubber Tired Gantry Crane) apply for the barge

between Tokyo and Yocohama shorten international

maritime container cargo transportation land distance

super eco-shipbuilding technology dissemination and

promotion green business certification operation

shippers and logistics companies support cooperation

Osaka Port AMP electrical power equipment solar power equipment

Hakata Port E-RTGC solar power utilization in refrigerated container

Korea Busan Port

LNG truck E-RTGC eco-friendly transport means

conversion (rail canal barge) GHG emission reduction

obligation

22

24 Green Port Indicators Research

As the previous section list shown Green Port measures and programs are

substantially the same

When a ship entry in the port boundary from voyage many ports give a

incentive on shifting and utilizing sulfur-low fuel and reducing the speed under

20 miles when the ship berth in the port the alternative maritime power are

provided which replace its power generation

Next in the cargo unloading and loading department the same with above

utilization of sulfur-low fuel and electrical equipment are promoted and

eco-driving education to driver is necessary what speed is fuel fully burning and

emission minimum point

In the cargo transport department in other words truck department the

replacement on aging trucks is popular in many ports aging trucks are prohibited

close to port at the same time an incentive or support function are provided on

aging replacement The automated equipments are recommended to utilize in the

Green Port like hybrid yard tractor And a perfect plan on truck running also could

reduce the idling time and against the emission of CO2

The details reference the following Table 241

23

Table241 Green Port measures in port each department

Emission reduction programs

Ship

department

Shipping

in the

port

boundary

Obligation on the utilization of sulfur-low fuel

Reform ship engine and utilize hybrid

Speed reduce in the port entrance(a off-shore fee

incentive)

Off-shore AMP

Shift utilization system of clean fuel

Unloading and loading

department

Obligation on the utilization of sulfur-low fuel

Replace electrical equipment

Eco-driving

Truck department Hybrid yard tractor utilization

Promote aging truck replacement

Minimum the idling time

Others LED light in the Port

Develop renew and recycle resource energy

The Green Port measures in this study are e-RTGC AMP AGV Green Ship

certification system incentives on the new clean technology Green Flag(speed

reduction incentive)eco-friendly transport means conversion joint distribution

the cost on account of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction polities and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

The details and definition on each Green Port measure and the relationship with

Port Competitiveness will be expressed in next chapter

24

Chapter 3 The Relationship between Port

Competitiveness and Green Port Construction

31 Port Competitiveness Literature Review

Although past studies on port selection models have focused on port selection

made by port facilities port services port rates and charge and location

Murphy made a survey between 534 shipping companies and port authorities in

1989 and between 1850 shipping companies and port authorities in 1992

Comparing with other papers Murphys got a survey among more widely

objects In his paper port selection(port competitiveness) was seen to affected by

facilities situation appropriate pilotage max ship entrance probability the

25

capability of handling non-regular cargos whether to provide information of ship

nationality or not and port services level

In French model (1979) there are two factors affecting the port selection (port

competitiveness) endogenous factor and exogenous factor In endogenous factors

there are adequacy and physical plant condition of terminal facilities terminal rate

and charges frequency and geographic coverage of ship and freight services the

capacity of connecting to inland rails or transport net and the services provides for

the shipping or logistics And exogenous factors included the size and economic

capacity of hinterland as a source exports or market for imports national

economic situation trade policy and support established by government the

situation at home and abroad

The same as Frenchs paper in Paters paper in 1990 there are endogenous and

exogenous factors too In endogenous there are the services provides for the

shipping or logistics capacity of terminal facilities situation and condition of

facilities operation strategies established by port authority convenience to utilize

And the political situation at home and abroad social change economic factor

stabilized labor and capital However in 2004 there is a tremendous change in

Peters new paper There are four parts multi-modal process interface transport

modes infrastructure Multi-model Process part includes ship entrance rapid

speed and accuracy shipper and shipping companies reactive operation flexibility

Interface includes labor power information technology and so on And there are

26

ship calls frequency and amount of fleet factors in the transport modes part In the

infrastructure part includes port facility equipments and so on

Port facilities rates and charges services inland situation and social

circumstance factors affect the port selection and competitiveness a lot from the

research until 1992 by Murphy And in Lirn and Pater research 2003-2004 the

new and detail factors are shown to us

We can clearly see the contents in next table

27

Table 311 Prevention literature research results

Influence factors

French

(1979)

Endogenous

port facilities port rate and charges calls frequency port services

port connection with inland

Exogenous

economic size of hinterland national economic situation trade

policy home and abroad situation

Willingale

(1982)

voyage distance economy size entrance to port and route port

facilities max ship entrance probability port operation rates and

charges port authority scale of port

Slack

(1985)

cost of inland transportation port proximity ship demurrage

multi-transport

Peter

(1990)

Endogenous

port facilities condition of facilities operation strategies

convenience to utilize

Exogenous

political situation social change economic factor stabilized labor

and capital

UNCTAD

(1992)

port facilities services location level of financial industry

information communication system social circumstances economic

stability

Murphy

(1992)

facilities situation appropriate pilotage max ship entrance

probability the capability of handling non-regular cargos whether to

provide information of ship nationality or not port services level

Lirn

(2003-2004)

physical and technologic facilities geopolitical location port

operation and management shipping and terminal cost

Peter

(2004)

Multi-modal Process

ship entrance rapid speed and accuracy shipper and shipping

companies reactive operation flexibility

Interface labor and capital

Transport modes ship calls frequency and amount of fleet factors

28

And there are many experts and scholars research for the influence factors to

port selection and competitiveness in Korea The specific content follows table5

Table 312 Literature research in Korean academia

Influence factors

Jeon Il-su (1992) location facilities charges service level (EDI) terminal operation

port authority

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

( 1993 )

location facilities throughput charges service operation

situation

Kim Hak-so

(1993)

export shipping amount of annual cost of each ton of cargo

marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km of

cargo loading time

import marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km

of cargo amount of liner ship

Yeo Gi-tae (1996) location facilities throughput charge service operation situation

Ha Dong-u amp

Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

location facilities service level logistics charges environment of

logistics service

Yeo Gi-tae (1999) location facilities throughput charges service

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

throughput quay length yard area GNP

Kum Jong-su

(2001)

distance between port and cargo site terminal facilities service

the capacity of multi-transport capacity of cargo handling

administrative service rates and charges of inland transport

congestion

Yeo Gi-tae (2002) location throughput facilities service level

Kim Jin-gu (2002) port facilities location cargo amount rates and charges services

29

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005)

voyage degree to attract cargo cargo handling cost amount of

handling cargo connection to inland service reliability location

berth availability quay length feeder network depth

transshipment volumes cargo security profitability

offing degree to attract cargo berth availability cargo handling

cost transshipment volumes

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005)

cargo handling amount port facilities location rates and charges

level of service

Heo Yun-su

(2005)

port facilities rates and charges services marketing geopolitics

location economic and social circumstance

Kim Geun-seop

(2007)

port services facilities cargo handling amount location cost

productivity factor global factor

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) rates and charges services port characteristics

Many experts and scholars make a research on port selection and

competitiveness recently But the factors selection criteria are difference

Nevertheless the main factors are facilities services cost and so on

Therefore port competitiveness factors which chose in this study are port

facilities port services port rates and charges and social circumstance

However the main factors are not the whole factors any more more and more

detail factors and characteristic factors appearance Port selection and

competitiveness factors have changed And the development content is introduced

in next part

30

32 Port Competitiveness Development Tree

As mentioned above port facilities port rates and charges and port location are

the basic factors in the port selection and competitiveness

From the following table we can discover that first one facilities rates and

charges and location are the most important factor in port selection and

competitiveness second one the importance of social circumstance turns larger

inland connection is necessary all the time

Table 321 Main factor in the Pretentious Research

31

port facilities rates and

charges

inland

connection

social

circumstance location

French (1979) radic radic radic

Wiliingale (1982) radic radic

Slack (1985) radic

Pater (1990) radic radic

UNCTAD (1992) radic radic radic

Murphy(1992) radic

Jeon Il-su (1992) radic radic radic

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

(1993)

radic radic radic

Kim Hak-so

(1993) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1996) radic radic radic

Ha Dong-u

amp Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1998) radic radic radic

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

radic

Kum Jong-su

(2001) radic radic radic radic

Kim Jin-gu(2002) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(2002) radic radic

Lirn(2003-2004) radic radic radic

Pater(2004) radic

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005) radic radic radic

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005) radic radic radic

Heo Yun-su

(2005) radic radic radic radic

Kim Geun-seop

(2007) radic radic radic radic

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) radic

32

33 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green

Port Construction

Following the research above Port facilities rates and charges inland

connection and social circumstance are chose in this study port selection and

competitiveness department

e-RTGC Electric rubber tired gantry crane is a mobile gantry crane used for

stacking intermodal containers within the stacking areas of a container terminal

e-RTGC are used at container terminals and container storage yards to straddling

multiple lanes of railroad and container storage or when maximum storage

density in the container stack is desired

AMP is shorted for Alternative Marine Power and Itrsquos a facility which

provides the electric system in the land for ship which entry in the port The

facility can reduce emissions which ship get entrance in the port

AGV is a mobile robot that follows markers or wires in the floor or uses

vision or lasers They are most often used in industrial applications to move

materials around a manufacturing facility or a warehouse Automatic Guided

Vehicle systems work around-the-clock making continuous flow and just-in-time

delivery easier to achieve Application of the automatic guided vehicle has broade

33

ned during the late 20th century and they are no longer restricted to industrial

environments

The e-RTGC AMP and AGV are the new clean facilities and equipments in the

Green Port they donrsquot reduce the efficiency of handling cargo and they also

reduce the CO2 emission account

Green ship certification system if a ship utilizes clean and CO2 emission

reduction technology on the ship building adds equipment and management and

son on certification would be received And the port authority gives some

incentive and preferential treatment among 45 ports Such as a better schedule is

provided for green membership ship priority in handing cargo and discount on

entrance fee

Incentives on the new cleaning technology There are two expressions about

this measure one is that the port authority give a incentive to ship which have a

great utilization on the new cleaning technology and the other one is that

environment provide many incentives to the authority which utilize the new

cleaning technology in the port such as LED street lamp solar power cranes

Green flag The Green Flag incentive program was set up to encourage ships to

slow down in order to improve air quality The Green Flag program provides

approximately $2 million a year in discounts for vessel operators who slow their

ships to 12 knots (22kmh) or less within 20miles (32km) of the harbor

34

According to the Port the Green Flag program reduced air pollution by 600tons in

2007 and is expected to do better in 2008

All of Green ship certification system incentives on the new cleaning

technology and Green Flag are incentives provided for users of port and aimed at

reduce port rates and charges So the 3 measures belong to affect port rates and

charges

Eco-friendly transport means conversion Eco-friendly means of transport are

much accounted of green port for example railway discharge less GHG emission

than truck barge with a clean engine among the river and inshore canal

Joint distribution joint distribution is a collaborative system which port

provides among many logistics companies It can make the cargo handling speed

rapidly and reduce cargo storage time for CO2 emission reducing such as

refrigerated container In an addition it also makes the logistics companies

transport more efficient

Cost on amount of CO2 emission differenced from other port the cost on

amount of CO2 is included in the port cost The cost aims to reduce the CO2

emission directly

CO2 emission reduction policies compared with other traditional port Green

Port gives more cost discount and incentives but in an addition there are many

policies on CO2 emission restriction Such as aging trucks restrictions in inland

transport department ship entry speed reduced and fuel changed in the ship

35

department and so on Whether these restriction policies constrain port

development or not and the degree of these policies constrain port development

will be explain by the AHP results

Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors some ports in the

western countries are opened as a travel place for visitors so as to change the

polluted impress and raise the position in our heart

Cost on amount of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction policies and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors can affect the social

circumstance factor Whether these measures can or not improve the social

circumstance and port competitiveness we have to see the next calculation and

results

36

Chapter 4 The Green Port Competitiveness

Analysis

41 The Green Port Competitiveness Model by AHP

The AHP is one multi-criteria decision making method which has been

extensively applied to a variety of decision-making situations The multi-criteria

techniques are considered to be a promising framework for evaluation of

decision-making factors since they have the potential to take into account

conflicting multidimensional incommensurable and uncertain effects of

decisions explicitly

In order to apply the AHP method a hierarchical decision schema was

constructed by decomposing the decision problem into its decision elements

37

After that the importance or preferences of the decision elements are examined in

a pair-wise comparison to the elements in the hierarchy The parameters are

estimated using pair-wise comparisons between the importance of the attribute or

decision element in the function using data made by each responder Making

comparisons is a question of which of the two attributes is more import as well as

how much more important

Follow these theories the Green Port Competitiveness Model choose factors as

follow in port competitiveness factors part there are port facilities port rates and

charges inland connection social circumstance in Green Port construction part

there are e-RTGC AMP AGV green ship certification system green flag

incentives on the new cleaning technology eco-friendly transport means

conversion joint distribution CO2 emission reduction policies cost on amount of

CO2 emission beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

38

Figure 41 Green Port Competitiveness AHP model

Follow the Green Port Competitiveness AHP as shown we set a questionnaire

survey to many experts scholars working in logistics system area And we got 15

ones and 14 ones results are believable and integrated

42 Green Port Competitiveness Analysis

39

The key to construction of the factors which affects the port competitiveness

is to determine the conceptual model The selection of the factors directly affects

the evaluation of the result In order to ensure the accuracy objectivity and

practicality of evaluation results the following basic principles must be followed

when selecting factors systematic principles the principle of universal

comparability practical principle and goal-oriented principle In view of the

foregoing the competitiveness which affected by Green Port construction model

is made The analysis follows established principles of port competitiveness

evaluation taking into account the characteristics and functions of the port as well

as port facilities port services port rates and charges ship entrance inland

connection social circumstances and so on

(1) Port facilities

e-RTGC U11 AMP U12 AGV U13

(2) Port rates and charges

Green ship certification system U21 Incentives on the new clean

technology U22 Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

(3) Inland connection

Eco-friendly means of transport U31 Joint distribution U32

(4) Social circumstances

40

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41 CO2 emission reduction policies

U42 Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors U43

Table 421 Details of Level I and Level II values

Level I

indicators Symbol Level II indicators Symbol

Port facilities A1

e-RTGC U11

AMP U12

AGV U13

Port rates and

charges A2

Green ship certification system U21

Incentives on the new clean technology U22

Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

Inland

connection A3

Eco-friendly means of transport U31

Joint distribution U32

Social

circumstances A4

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41

CO2 emissions reduction policies U42

Beautiful environment construction in inner

harbors U43

41

I Determination of level I indicator weights

As the ports competitiveness evaluation indicators at this level are complex

and the elements are not easily quantified AHP is adopted to determine the

indicator weights with the basic steps as follows

(1) Establish a comparative judgment matrix The comparative judgment

matrix is obtained through comparing contributed proportion of multiple

indicators to the overall target by the judgment scale wherein the fuzzy

judgment number introduced is 1 3 5 7 and 9 and the reciprocal of

such number indicates the important degree of one element relatively to

another The results are shown in next table

Table 422 Comparison matrix of level I indicators

A1 A2 A3 A4

A1 1 15 13 3

A2 5 1 3 7

A3 3 13 1 5

A4 13 17 15 1

(2) Calculate the characteristic vector of the comparative judgment matrix

which refers to the weighted vector of the indicator The writer adopts

42

the geometric method to calculate the characteristic vector The

calculated result is as follows

ω=(012 0560 026 006)T λmax=418 It can be obtained from the table

RI=09 Wherein ω is the characteristic vector corresponding to the

maximum characteristic value λmax of the comparative judgment matrix

namely the weighted vector of the indicator RI is the average

consistency indicator as shown in following table

Table423 Average random consistency indicator RI

Matrix Order

RI

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

0 0 058 09 112 124 132 141

Matrix Order

RI

9 10 11 12 13 14 15

145 149 152 154 156 158 159

(3) Conduct consistency check on the comparative judgment matrix Adopt

the random consistency proportion CR to judge the consistency of the

comparative judgment matrix According to CI= (λmax -n)(n-1) and

CR=CIRI it can be obtained through calculation CR=007lt01 Thus

this comparative judgment matrix has a satisfactory consistency and the

indicator weight coefficient calculated through this matrix is acceptable

43

II Determination of level II indicator weights

The data at this level are the details of level Ⅰ indicator The judgment

matrix obtained through comparing multiple sub-indicators under Level Ⅰ

indicators is adopted to determine the weights of sub-indicators under each

indicator one by one The specific steps are as follows

(1) The experts score the weights within the given range To determine the

weights of several small indicators under the same big indicator it is

supposed that the score of small indicator ｋ under the indicator j made

by the expert i is Xijk wherein i=12n n is the total number of

experts ј=12m m is the total number of LevelⅡ indicator к

=12Oj Oj is the number of small indicators under the big indicator ј

іјк IJK LRC l I j k

(2) The credit rating of the expert і is l l =1 2 3 l =1 indicates this expert

is quite familiar with the evaluated contents l =2 indicator this expert is

44

with the evaluated contents l =3 indicates this expert is not quite familiar

with the evaluated contents yi1 is the=08 yi2 =05 and yi3=1

(3) The comprehensive evaluation score of small indicator l under the

indicator j is as follows

(4) The formula for normalization processing of indicator weights is as

follows and the absolute weight of the indicator set is marked as

q=(q1q2q11)

(5) Because of the same justification and principle we donrsquot give the detail

about the calculation The same with the level Ⅰ calculation we

manipulation data one by one and get 14 results And obtain the average

45

results by weighted average method The results detail as Table for the

final weights of Level-Ⅱ evaluation indicators

Above the calculation process and method are just one of data from the

questionable surveys In this study the final results are got from the

weighted average by the results of each questionable survey

The final results are shown as Table424

Table424 Indicator weights table of indicator system

Level I

indicators Weight LevelⅡ indicators

Relative

weight

Absolute

weight

Importance

percentage

Port Facilities

A1 02735

e-RTGC U11 05506 01506 1506

AMP U12 01648 00451 451

AGV U13 02826 00773 773

Port Rates and

Charges A2

02902

Green ship certification s

ystem U21 04724 01371 1371

Incentives on the new

clean technology U22 02871 00833 833

Green Flag (speed

reduction incentive)U23 02405 00698 698

Inland

connection A3

02865

Eco-friendly means of

transport U31 05942 01702 1702

Joint distribution U32 04058 01163 1163

Social

environmentA4 00863

Cost on amount of CO2

emission U41 03698 00319 319

CO2 emissions reduction

policies U42 02273 00196 196

Beautiful environment

construction in inner

harbors U43

04029 00348 348

46

III Case study

In the questionable survey we also got the mark of Green Port measures

evaluation value of many main ports such as Singapore Port Shanghai Port

Hongkong Port Busan Port LALB Port Rotterdam Port and Yocohama Port

The highest mark is 5 and lowest one is 1

Table425 Evaluation value of many main ports

Singapore

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

LALB

Port

Rotterdam

Port

Yocohama

Port

Port facilities 38000 36000 34000 38182 38000 42000 32000

Port rates and

charges 32000 36000 31000 35455 32000 39000 33000

Inland

connection 39000 34545 35000 29091 35000 45000 36000

Social

circumstance 42000 32727 41000 32000 38000 42727 36000

With the Green Port and Port competitiveness indicator weights results these

ports got the final evaluation value

47

Table426 Final evaluation value on main ports Green Port measures and

competitiveness

Rotterdam

Port

Singapore

Port

LALB

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

Yocohama

Port

394 345 330 330 319 318 317

43 Results Analysis

From the results table we can obtain the many results as following

① The main Green Port measures which are more important to improve port

competitiveness are Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system the indicator weights are 01702 01506 and

01371 among the 11 indicators

② In the Green Port construction Cost on amount of CO2 emission and CO2

emissions reduction policies are the restrictions indicators but the weight

of two indicators are not big 00319 and 00196 So effect on Green Port

construction to port competitiveness does have the weaken capacity but

not clearly strengthen more clearly Thus Green Port construction really

could improve the port competitiveness

48

③ In the case study traditional ports Rotterdam and Singapore Port give us

better examples on Green Port construction especially Rotterdam Port

④ Hongkong Busan and Yocohama Port all got a lower evaluation value

But in detail Hongkong and Yocohama Port got a lower on the port

facilities and rates and charges Busan Port got a higher on the port

facilities and rates and charges but a lower on the inland connection and

social circumstance

⑤ Shanghai Port doesnrsquot have Particular strength factors but the

comprehensive strength is not bad the same as LALB Port

49

Chapter 5 Conclusion

In this thesis the effects of Green Port construction for improving the port

competitiveness have been studied Under the definition of Green Port the

characteristics of Green Port and its effects has been shown by analysing the AHP

method which based on the questionary survey for Green Port specialists and port

officers

Follow the results of analysis on Green Port competitiveness AHP model

Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green ship certification system is

better for Green Port Construction welcome for shipping companies and citizens

who live around the port And in the analysis of Port competitiveness factors port

rates and charges always affects port competitiveness a lot As a trend inland

connection factor abstracts more attention of shipping companies

50

On the trend of port department each port should take a activity to adjust

strategy for improving its competitiveness Such as in the main ports evaluation

Busan port get a high value on port rates and charges and port facilities but as a

lower value on inland connection factor the final value is not as well as we look

forward In the evaluation of Singapore Port through it gets a lower value on rates

and charges higher value on inland connection and social circumstance causes the

final value are better So the Green Port Construction may be a trend in port

department

In the results of this thesis Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system are better solutions for Green Port Construction And

especially it can be verified that the port rates and charges always affects port

competitiveness Futhermore the investment for Green Port construction and its

effects have to be verified in the future

51

References

1 Hoyle B S and Smith J 1992 Transport and Development In Modern

transport geography edited by B S Hoyle R D Knowles (London Belhaven

Press)pp11-31

2 Beresford A K C De Souza A J R G and Pettit S J 2005 Stategic

development of liner shipping companies and terminal operators Ocean yearbook

19(Chicago 1L The University of Chicago Press) pp 732-750

3 Heaver T D 2002 Supply chain and logistics management implications for

liner shipping In The handbook of maritime economics and business edited by C

Grammenos (LondonLLP) pp 375-396

4 Park T E (2011) A Study on selection criteria of Green Port and evaluation of

major Korean port A masters thesis of graduate school of Incheon university

52

5 JeongBH (2009)Green port management policy directions in the green

growth era- The case of Gwangyang port in Republic of Korea Journal of Korea

Port Economic Association Vol25(3) p361-384

6 Lee J S Han N H(2009) A study on Green Port Revitalization According to

Air Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

7 Lee Y K Nan J W(2010)Green Logistics Policy Analysis and Implications

of Japan

8 Lee B S (2010)Tendency and Countermeasures on Green Logistics in Port

Logistics Company A masters thesis of graduate school of Korean Maritime

university

9 Lee J S (2009) A Study on Green Port Revitalization According to Air

Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

10 Zhang F Y Li Z Lu X J Yao X L(2008)Competitiveness of Inland

Ports Based on F-AHP

11 Port of Long Beach (2009) Green Port Policy wwwpolbcom

12 The port of Los Angeles wwwportoflosangelesorg

12

port And in their construction maybe add a few other type promote director like

beauty the port by green park planting and so on

However in this study the Green Port concept is a comprehensive plan among

4 types not a specialization system

23 Green Port Construction Situation in major countries

After ltKyoto protocolgt having brought out each department began to take

affords on the reducing the GHG (greenhouse gas) emission In port department

the activities are embodied in the Green Port construction In this study many

major ports in US EU Japan and Korea are chose to explain for research

231 US

① LALB Port

In order to achieve to reduce marine pollutants standby and build clean port

LALB Port standby resource ministry and environment protection ministry

signed a 5year plan on clean standby action cooperation

This promotion business plan set a set of marine pollutants standby emission

limitation on the ship department from the statistics year 2006-2007 to 2010-2011

handling department heavy duty equipment truck department and so on Such as

13

in Green Port Technology construction department measures and programs are

shown in following Table

Table231 the details of LALB Port Green Port Promotion Programs

Promotion Program

Heavy Equipment Truck

Heavy Equipment

Replace and Update Aging Facilities

Substitute Fuels and Clean Fuel Incentives

Budgetary for the Development of Substitute Fuels

Marine Vessels Tugs

Ship Speed Reduction within the Port

Electrical supply of parking in the Berth

Use low-sulfur fuel (supplementary motor)

Handling Equipment

Air Quality Monitoring

Measure ambient air pollution levels in the vicinity of

the Port

Include a number of real-time air quality measurements

On the restrict situation of heavy equipment trucks and others vessels must to

be replaced and rebuilt in order to minimum the emission of NOx And the trucks

which donrsquot reach the regulate standard do not allowed to get in the port These

regulations will help their owner to replace and update trucks and also set up a

replacement plan to 16000 aging trucks make the replace done by 2012 As

foundation repaired the cargo owner must to pay an addition tax about 20ft 35$

40ft 79$

14

In the maritime department the speed reduction incentive took action in

Jan2005 When ship entry into the port boundary speed must be reduced under

20 miles 12kont At the beginning the effect of this plan is very clearly so the

limitation may be raised to 40mile And AMP (Alternative Maritime Power ) is

encouraged to be built and developed as to ship use their engine and get GHG

emission

② New York- New Jersey Port

The New York- New Jersey Port Authority brought out environment policy on

CO2 emission reduction The main concepts as following first reduce PX SOX

3 each year and CO2 5 Second ship must utilize sulfur-low fuel as a

obligation Third AMP is provided Forth modern the unloading and loading

equipment must be built Fifth promote trucks replacement Sixth reform the ship

engine Seventh invent 9 billion dollars in the following 10 years Eighth invent

to all hybrid equipment (325) Ninth install the hybrid truck in AMPT and

NYCT

③ Seattle Port

15

In Seattle Port Air Environment Maritime Improvement plan has been

accepted in 2005 The plan includes first set up Puget Sound Maritime Air

Forum and make one AMP provide services for two tour ships second change

the diesel hybrid equipment into electric utilization Third use bio-diesel and

diesel catalyst and reduce the emission Forth emphasize the standard and plan of

truck minimum the idling time

Seattle Port Tacoma Port and Vancouver made a assignment and promote

ldquoNorthwest Ports Clean Air Strategyrdquo

④ Auckland Port

Auckland Port set up the aging replacement plan in 2008 and invent 20 milion

dollars gas emission should reach the level And cargo transport system in port

hinterland port authority and Air environment management committee make

cooperation and give an incentive to truck which use new clean technology

Table232 Short term and Long term Green Port Plans in Auckland Port

16

17

232 EU

Rotterdam Port

As the biggest Port in EU Rotterdam Port takes more affords in reducing the

CO2 emission Main programs are low carbon footprint AMP and so on The

limitation of CO2 emission reduces down 50 of 1990 by 2025

In July 2008 the authority of Rotterdam port gave international cooperation

with other ports an extra boost by organizing the World Ports Climate Conference

During this conference the authority of Rotterdam discussed possible ways in

which ports and business could reduce air pollution and CO2 emissions The

proposals the authority of Rotterdam was set out in a declaration which was

supported by all 55 port cities attending the conference The conference resulted

in five projects to improve air quality and reduce CO2 emissions The authority of

Rotterdam is behind the project to further elaborate an Environmental Ship Index

The Rotterdam Climate Initiative is a joint venture with the municipality of

Rotterdam DCMR Environmental Protection Agency Rijnmond and Deltalinqs

Common goal is to halve CO2 emissions in the region by 2025 in comparison with

1990 levels In connection with the Rotterdam Climate Initiative the port works

on (together with DCMR and others) creating an infrastructure for the capture

18

transport and storage of CO2 A business case presented in the summer of 2008 is

now being elaborated into a business plan The business case concludes that

Rotterdam can begin in 2015 with the capture transport and underground storage

of five million tons of CO2 per annum This means that the basic infrastructure

will then be in place for further growth in capture and storage to twenty million

tons in 2025

In 2008 a start was made on the development of a sustainability index for

activities relating to the P for Planet (environment) In 2009 it will further expand

the index to cover the P for People and the P for Profit In the first phase of the

sustainability index CO2 footprint sustainable purchasing sustainable building

and sustainable land allocation will be covered

233 Japan

① Tacoma Port

In the Tacoma Port there are some programs on protecting the air water and

soil environment

In the air protection department ldquoNorthwest Ports Clean Air Strategyrdquo

ldquoGreen Gateway for Traderdquo and ldquoTruck Programrdquo had brought out to against air

pollution The concepts include using ultra-low sulfur diesel bio-diesel and other

cleaner-burning fuels in cargo-handling equipment using low-sulfur distillate

19

fuels at berth adding ldquogreen designrdquo environmental features to ships including

diesel-electric motors that save up to 30 percent in fuel and significantly reduce

emissions setting targets to change older less-efficient truck engines installing

anti-idling devices on rail-switching engines as well as partnering on other

innovative technological advance

The Port of Tacomarsquos four dockside rail yards move cargo quickly and

efficiently from container terminals They also reduce the number of trucks on

city streets and highways Each full train that leaves the Port represents 250 to 300

trucks not on our roads reducing roadway congestion and diesel emissions The

lowest emission route to ship cargo from Asia to the US Midwest is through the

Puget Sound according to the results of a study by Herbert Engineering released

in May 2009

And in the land protection program there are successful clean projects open

spaces and future habitat restoration In 2007 the Port purchased about 70 acres

of open space known as Juliarsquos Gulch and Storey Pit located between the

Tideflats and residential Northeast Tacoma Monitor water quality system is in

utilization in the water department in Tacoma Port

② Tokyo Port

In the Tokyo Port Green Port programs are almost similar with Tacoma Port

e-RTGC (Rubber Tired Gantry Crane) the barge between Tokyo and Yocohama

20

which shorten international maritime container cargo transportation land distance

super eco-shipbuilding technology dissemination and promotion green business

certification operation and shippers and logistics companies support cooperation

③ Osaka Port and Hakata Port

AMP electrical power equipment and solar power equipment are in utilization in

Osaka Port E-RTGC and solar power of refrigerated container are in utilization in

the Hakata Port

234 Korea

In Busan Port a set of Green Port took implementation such as LNG truck

E-RTGC equipment utilization eco-friendly transport means conversion (rail

canal barge) and GHG emission reduction obligation Table233

21

ltTable 233gt Summary of the Main Port of Green Port Measures

COUNTRY PORT MEASURES

US

LALB Port

Green flag AMP discharge gas reduction obligation

recommends use of alternative fuels and clean fuel

funding for the development of alternative fuels facilities

by new engine development instead of NOx emissions

green truck program (reduce70-80) low-sulfur fuel

utilization restore and revitalize the Los Cerritos

Wetlands

New York

Port

AMP modernized facilities utilization high speed hybrid

yard

Auckland

Port

Incentives on the new cleaning technology containers

transportation system

Seattle Port

AMP green ship membership Tier 4 level reducing PM

by 1994 level Smart Way program Northwest Ports

Clean Air Strategy

EU Rotterdam

Port

Clean engine (barge) green ship membership carbon

footprint calculation cruise ship which under port

authority change to use low-sulfur fuel low emission

engine development and utilization Green Award AMP

ship recycling incentives

Japan

Tokyo Port

RTGC (Rubber Tired Gantry Crane) apply for the barge

between Tokyo and Yocohama shorten international

maritime container cargo transportation land distance

super eco-shipbuilding technology dissemination and

promotion green business certification operation

shippers and logistics companies support cooperation

Osaka Port AMP electrical power equipment solar power equipment

Hakata Port E-RTGC solar power utilization in refrigerated container

Korea Busan Port

LNG truck E-RTGC eco-friendly transport means

conversion (rail canal barge) GHG emission reduction

obligation

22

24 Green Port Indicators Research

As the previous section list shown Green Port measures and programs are

substantially the same

When a ship entry in the port boundary from voyage many ports give a

incentive on shifting and utilizing sulfur-low fuel and reducing the speed under

20 miles when the ship berth in the port the alternative maritime power are

provided which replace its power generation

Next in the cargo unloading and loading department the same with above

utilization of sulfur-low fuel and electrical equipment are promoted and

eco-driving education to driver is necessary what speed is fuel fully burning and

emission minimum point

In the cargo transport department in other words truck department the

replacement on aging trucks is popular in many ports aging trucks are prohibited

close to port at the same time an incentive or support function are provided on

aging replacement The automated equipments are recommended to utilize in the

Green Port like hybrid yard tractor And a perfect plan on truck running also could

reduce the idling time and against the emission of CO2

The details reference the following Table 241

23

Table241 Green Port measures in port each department

Emission reduction programs

Ship

department

Shipping

in the

port

boundary

Obligation on the utilization of sulfur-low fuel

Reform ship engine and utilize hybrid

Speed reduce in the port entrance(a off-shore fee

incentive)

Off-shore AMP

Shift utilization system of clean fuel

Unloading and loading

department

Obligation on the utilization of sulfur-low fuel

Replace electrical equipment

Eco-driving

Truck department Hybrid yard tractor utilization

Promote aging truck replacement

Minimum the idling time

Others LED light in the Port

Develop renew and recycle resource energy

The Green Port measures in this study are e-RTGC AMP AGV Green Ship

certification system incentives on the new clean technology Green Flag(speed

reduction incentive)eco-friendly transport means conversion joint distribution

the cost on account of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction polities and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

The details and definition on each Green Port measure and the relationship with

Port Competitiveness will be expressed in next chapter

24

Chapter 3 The Relationship between Port

Competitiveness and Green Port Construction

31 Port Competitiveness Literature Review

Although past studies on port selection models have focused on port selection

made by port facilities port services port rates and charge and location

Murphy made a survey between 534 shipping companies and port authorities in

1989 and between 1850 shipping companies and port authorities in 1992

Comparing with other papers Murphys got a survey among more widely

objects In his paper port selection(port competitiveness) was seen to affected by

facilities situation appropriate pilotage max ship entrance probability the

25

capability of handling non-regular cargos whether to provide information of ship

nationality or not and port services level

In French model (1979) there are two factors affecting the port selection (port

competitiveness) endogenous factor and exogenous factor In endogenous factors

there are adequacy and physical plant condition of terminal facilities terminal rate

and charges frequency and geographic coverage of ship and freight services the

capacity of connecting to inland rails or transport net and the services provides for

the shipping or logistics And exogenous factors included the size and economic

capacity of hinterland as a source exports or market for imports national

economic situation trade policy and support established by government the

situation at home and abroad

The same as Frenchs paper in Paters paper in 1990 there are endogenous and

exogenous factors too In endogenous there are the services provides for the

shipping or logistics capacity of terminal facilities situation and condition of

facilities operation strategies established by port authority convenience to utilize

And the political situation at home and abroad social change economic factor

stabilized labor and capital However in 2004 there is a tremendous change in

Peters new paper There are four parts multi-modal process interface transport

modes infrastructure Multi-model Process part includes ship entrance rapid

speed and accuracy shipper and shipping companies reactive operation flexibility

Interface includes labor power information technology and so on And there are

26

ship calls frequency and amount of fleet factors in the transport modes part In the

infrastructure part includes port facility equipments and so on

Port facilities rates and charges services inland situation and social

circumstance factors affect the port selection and competitiveness a lot from the

research until 1992 by Murphy And in Lirn and Pater research 2003-2004 the

new and detail factors are shown to us

We can clearly see the contents in next table

27

Table 311 Prevention literature research results

Influence factors

French

(1979)

Endogenous

port facilities port rate and charges calls frequency port services

port connection with inland

Exogenous

economic size of hinterland national economic situation trade

policy home and abroad situation

Willingale

(1982)

voyage distance economy size entrance to port and route port

facilities max ship entrance probability port operation rates and

charges port authority scale of port

Slack

(1985)

cost of inland transportation port proximity ship demurrage

multi-transport

Peter

(1990)

Endogenous

port facilities condition of facilities operation strategies

convenience to utilize

Exogenous

political situation social change economic factor stabilized labor

and capital

UNCTAD

(1992)

port facilities services location level of financial industry

information communication system social circumstances economic

stability

Murphy

(1992)

facilities situation appropriate pilotage max ship entrance

probability the capability of handling non-regular cargos whether to

provide information of ship nationality or not port services level

Lirn

(2003-2004)

physical and technologic facilities geopolitical location port

operation and management shipping and terminal cost

Peter

(2004)

Multi-modal Process

ship entrance rapid speed and accuracy shipper and shipping

companies reactive operation flexibility

Interface labor and capital

Transport modes ship calls frequency and amount of fleet factors

28

And there are many experts and scholars research for the influence factors to

port selection and competitiveness in Korea The specific content follows table5

Table 312 Literature research in Korean academia

Influence factors

Jeon Il-su (1992) location facilities charges service level (EDI) terminal operation

port authority

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

( 1993 )

location facilities throughput charges service operation

situation

Kim Hak-so

(1993)

export shipping amount of annual cost of each ton of cargo

marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km of

cargo loading time

import marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km

of cargo amount of liner ship

Yeo Gi-tae (1996) location facilities throughput charge service operation situation

Ha Dong-u amp

Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

location facilities service level logistics charges environment of

logistics service

Yeo Gi-tae (1999) location facilities throughput charges service

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

throughput quay length yard area GNP

Kum Jong-su

(2001)

distance between port and cargo site terminal facilities service

the capacity of multi-transport capacity of cargo handling

administrative service rates and charges of inland transport

congestion

Yeo Gi-tae (2002) location throughput facilities service level

Kim Jin-gu (2002) port facilities location cargo amount rates and charges services

29

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005)

voyage degree to attract cargo cargo handling cost amount of

handling cargo connection to inland service reliability location

berth availability quay length feeder network depth

transshipment volumes cargo security profitability

offing degree to attract cargo berth availability cargo handling

cost transshipment volumes

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005)

cargo handling amount port facilities location rates and charges

level of service

Heo Yun-su

(2005)

port facilities rates and charges services marketing geopolitics

location economic and social circumstance

Kim Geun-seop

(2007)

port services facilities cargo handling amount location cost

productivity factor global factor

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) rates and charges services port characteristics

Many experts and scholars make a research on port selection and

competitiveness recently But the factors selection criteria are difference

Nevertheless the main factors are facilities services cost and so on

Therefore port competitiveness factors which chose in this study are port

facilities port services port rates and charges and social circumstance

However the main factors are not the whole factors any more more and more

detail factors and characteristic factors appearance Port selection and

competitiveness factors have changed And the development content is introduced

in next part

30

32 Port Competitiveness Development Tree

As mentioned above port facilities port rates and charges and port location are

the basic factors in the port selection and competitiveness

From the following table we can discover that first one facilities rates and

charges and location are the most important factor in port selection and

competitiveness second one the importance of social circumstance turns larger

inland connection is necessary all the time

Table 321 Main factor in the Pretentious Research

31

port facilities rates and

charges

inland

connection

social

circumstance location

French (1979) radic radic radic

Wiliingale (1982) radic radic

Slack (1985) radic

Pater (1990) radic radic

UNCTAD (1992) radic radic radic

Murphy(1992) radic

Jeon Il-su (1992) radic radic radic

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

(1993)

radic radic radic

Kim Hak-so

(1993) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1996) radic radic radic

Ha Dong-u

amp Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1998) radic radic radic

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

radic

Kum Jong-su

(2001) radic radic radic radic

Kim Jin-gu(2002) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(2002) radic radic

Lirn(2003-2004) radic radic radic

Pater(2004) radic

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005) radic radic radic

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005) radic radic radic

Heo Yun-su

(2005) radic radic radic radic

Kim Geun-seop

(2007) radic radic radic radic

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) radic

32

33 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green

Port Construction

Following the research above Port facilities rates and charges inland

connection and social circumstance are chose in this study port selection and

competitiveness department

e-RTGC Electric rubber tired gantry crane is a mobile gantry crane used for

stacking intermodal containers within the stacking areas of a container terminal

e-RTGC are used at container terminals and container storage yards to straddling

multiple lanes of railroad and container storage or when maximum storage

density in the container stack is desired

AMP is shorted for Alternative Marine Power and Itrsquos a facility which

provides the electric system in the land for ship which entry in the port The

facility can reduce emissions which ship get entrance in the port

AGV is a mobile robot that follows markers or wires in the floor or uses

vision or lasers They are most often used in industrial applications to move

materials around a manufacturing facility or a warehouse Automatic Guided

Vehicle systems work around-the-clock making continuous flow and just-in-time

delivery easier to achieve Application of the automatic guided vehicle has broade

33

ned during the late 20th century and they are no longer restricted to industrial

environments

The e-RTGC AMP and AGV are the new clean facilities and equipments in the

Green Port they donrsquot reduce the efficiency of handling cargo and they also

reduce the CO2 emission account

Green ship certification system if a ship utilizes clean and CO2 emission

reduction technology on the ship building adds equipment and management and

son on certification would be received And the port authority gives some

incentive and preferential treatment among 45 ports Such as a better schedule is

provided for green membership ship priority in handing cargo and discount on

entrance fee

Incentives on the new cleaning technology There are two expressions about

this measure one is that the port authority give a incentive to ship which have a

great utilization on the new cleaning technology and the other one is that

environment provide many incentives to the authority which utilize the new

cleaning technology in the port such as LED street lamp solar power cranes

Green flag The Green Flag incentive program was set up to encourage ships to

slow down in order to improve air quality The Green Flag program provides

approximately $2 million a year in discounts for vessel operators who slow their

ships to 12 knots (22kmh) or less within 20miles (32km) of the harbor

34

According to the Port the Green Flag program reduced air pollution by 600tons in

2007 and is expected to do better in 2008

All of Green ship certification system incentives on the new cleaning

technology and Green Flag are incentives provided for users of port and aimed at

reduce port rates and charges So the 3 measures belong to affect port rates and

charges

Eco-friendly transport means conversion Eco-friendly means of transport are

much accounted of green port for example railway discharge less GHG emission

than truck barge with a clean engine among the river and inshore canal

Joint distribution joint distribution is a collaborative system which port

provides among many logistics companies It can make the cargo handling speed

rapidly and reduce cargo storage time for CO2 emission reducing such as

refrigerated container In an addition it also makes the logistics companies

transport more efficient

Cost on amount of CO2 emission differenced from other port the cost on

amount of CO2 is included in the port cost The cost aims to reduce the CO2

emission directly

CO2 emission reduction policies compared with other traditional port Green

Port gives more cost discount and incentives but in an addition there are many

policies on CO2 emission restriction Such as aging trucks restrictions in inland

transport department ship entry speed reduced and fuel changed in the ship

35

department and so on Whether these restriction policies constrain port

development or not and the degree of these policies constrain port development

will be explain by the AHP results

Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors some ports in the

western countries are opened as a travel place for visitors so as to change the

polluted impress and raise the position in our heart

Cost on amount of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction policies and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors can affect the social

circumstance factor Whether these measures can or not improve the social

circumstance and port competitiveness we have to see the next calculation and

results

36

Chapter 4 The Green Port Competitiveness

Analysis

41 The Green Port Competitiveness Model by AHP

The AHP is one multi-criteria decision making method which has been

extensively applied to a variety of decision-making situations The multi-criteria

techniques are considered to be a promising framework for evaluation of

decision-making factors since they have the potential to take into account

conflicting multidimensional incommensurable and uncertain effects of

decisions explicitly

In order to apply the AHP method a hierarchical decision schema was

constructed by decomposing the decision problem into its decision elements

37

After that the importance or preferences of the decision elements are examined in

a pair-wise comparison to the elements in the hierarchy The parameters are

estimated using pair-wise comparisons between the importance of the attribute or

decision element in the function using data made by each responder Making

comparisons is a question of which of the two attributes is more import as well as

how much more important

Follow these theories the Green Port Competitiveness Model choose factors as

follow in port competitiveness factors part there are port facilities port rates and

charges inland connection social circumstance in Green Port construction part

there are e-RTGC AMP AGV green ship certification system green flag

incentives on the new cleaning technology eco-friendly transport means

conversion joint distribution CO2 emission reduction policies cost on amount of

CO2 emission beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

38

Figure 41 Green Port Competitiveness AHP model

Follow the Green Port Competitiveness AHP as shown we set a questionnaire

survey to many experts scholars working in logistics system area And we got 15

ones and 14 ones results are believable and integrated

42 Green Port Competitiveness Analysis

39

The key to construction of the factors which affects the port competitiveness

is to determine the conceptual model The selection of the factors directly affects

the evaluation of the result In order to ensure the accuracy objectivity and

practicality of evaluation results the following basic principles must be followed

when selecting factors systematic principles the principle of universal

comparability practical principle and goal-oriented principle In view of the

foregoing the competitiveness which affected by Green Port construction model

is made The analysis follows established principles of port competitiveness

evaluation taking into account the characteristics and functions of the port as well

as port facilities port services port rates and charges ship entrance inland

connection social circumstances and so on

(1) Port facilities

e-RTGC U11 AMP U12 AGV U13

(2) Port rates and charges

Green ship certification system U21 Incentives on the new clean

technology U22 Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

(3) Inland connection

Eco-friendly means of transport U31 Joint distribution U32

(4) Social circumstances

40

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41 CO2 emission reduction policies

U42 Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors U43

Table 421 Details of Level I and Level II values

Level I

indicators Symbol Level II indicators Symbol

Port facilities A1

e-RTGC U11

AMP U12

AGV U13

Port rates and

charges A2

Green ship certification system U21

Incentives on the new clean technology U22

Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

Inland

connection A3

Eco-friendly means of transport U31

Joint distribution U32

Social

circumstances A4

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41

CO2 emissions reduction policies U42

Beautiful environment construction in inner

harbors U43

41

I Determination of level I indicator weights

As the ports competitiveness evaluation indicators at this level are complex

and the elements are not easily quantified AHP is adopted to determine the

indicator weights with the basic steps as follows

(1) Establish a comparative judgment matrix The comparative judgment

matrix is obtained through comparing contributed proportion of multiple

indicators to the overall target by the judgment scale wherein the fuzzy

judgment number introduced is 1 3 5 7 and 9 and the reciprocal of

such number indicates the important degree of one element relatively to

another The results are shown in next table

Table 422 Comparison matrix of level I indicators

A1 A2 A3 A4

A1 1 15 13 3

A2 5 1 3 7

A3 3 13 1 5

A4 13 17 15 1

(2) Calculate the characteristic vector of the comparative judgment matrix

which refers to the weighted vector of the indicator The writer adopts

42

the geometric method to calculate the characteristic vector The

calculated result is as follows

ω=(012 0560 026 006)T λmax=418 It can be obtained from the table

RI=09 Wherein ω is the characteristic vector corresponding to the

maximum characteristic value λmax of the comparative judgment matrix

namely the weighted vector of the indicator RI is the average

consistency indicator as shown in following table

Table423 Average random consistency indicator RI

Matrix Order

RI

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

0 0 058 09 112 124 132 141

Matrix Order

RI

9 10 11 12 13 14 15

145 149 152 154 156 158 159

(3) Conduct consistency check on the comparative judgment matrix Adopt

the random consistency proportion CR to judge the consistency of the

comparative judgment matrix According to CI= (λmax -n)(n-1) and

CR=CIRI it can be obtained through calculation CR=007lt01 Thus

this comparative judgment matrix has a satisfactory consistency and the

indicator weight coefficient calculated through this matrix is acceptable

43

II Determination of level II indicator weights

The data at this level are the details of level Ⅰ indicator The judgment

matrix obtained through comparing multiple sub-indicators under Level Ⅰ

indicators is adopted to determine the weights of sub-indicators under each

indicator one by one The specific steps are as follows

(1) The experts score the weights within the given range To determine the

weights of several small indicators under the same big indicator it is

supposed that the score of small indicator ｋ under the indicator j made

by the expert i is Xijk wherein i=12n n is the total number of

experts ј=12m m is the total number of LevelⅡ indicator к

=12Oj Oj is the number of small indicators under the big indicator ј

іјк IJK LRC l I j k

(2) The credit rating of the expert і is l l =1 2 3 l =1 indicates this expert

is quite familiar with the evaluated contents l =2 indicator this expert is

44

with the evaluated contents l =3 indicates this expert is not quite familiar

with the evaluated contents yi1 is the=08 yi2 =05 and yi3=1

(3) The comprehensive evaluation score of small indicator l under the

indicator j is as follows

(4) The formula for normalization processing of indicator weights is as

follows and the absolute weight of the indicator set is marked as

q=(q1q2q11)

(5) Because of the same justification and principle we donrsquot give the detail

about the calculation The same with the level Ⅰ calculation we

manipulation data one by one and get 14 results And obtain the average

45

results by weighted average method The results detail as Table for the

final weights of Level-Ⅱ evaluation indicators

Above the calculation process and method are just one of data from the

questionable surveys In this study the final results are got from the

weighted average by the results of each questionable survey

The final results are shown as Table424

Table424 Indicator weights table of indicator system

Level I

indicators Weight LevelⅡ indicators

Relative

weight

Absolute

weight

Importance

percentage

Port Facilities

A1 02735

e-RTGC U11 05506 01506 1506

AMP U12 01648 00451 451

AGV U13 02826 00773 773

Port Rates and

Charges A2

02902

Green ship certification s

ystem U21 04724 01371 1371

Incentives on the new

clean technology U22 02871 00833 833

Green Flag (speed

reduction incentive)U23 02405 00698 698

Inland

connection A3

02865

Eco-friendly means of

transport U31 05942 01702 1702

Joint distribution U32 04058 01163 1163

Social

environmentA4 00863

Cost on amount of CO2

emission U41 03698 00319 319

CO2 emissions reduction

policies U42 02273 00196 196

Beautiful environment

construction in inner

harbors U43

04029 00348 348

46

III Case study

In the questionable survey we also got the mark of Green Port measures

evaluation value of many main ports such as Singapore Port Shanghai Port

Hongkong Port Busan Port LALB Port Rotterdam Port and Yocohama Port

The highest mark is 5 and lowest one is 1

Table425 Evaluation value of many main ports

Singapore

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

LALB

Port

Rotterdam

Port

Yocohama

Port

Port facilities 38000 36000 34000 38182 38000 42000 32000

Port rates and

charges 32000 36000 31000 35455 32000 39000 33000

Inland

connection 39000 34545 35000 29091 35000 45000 36000

Social

circumstance 42000 32727 41000 32000 38000 42727 36000

With the Green Port and Port competitiveness indicator weights results these

ports got the final evaluation value

47

Table426 Final evaluation value on main ports Green Port measures and

competitiveness

Rotterdam

Port

Singapore

Port

LALB

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

Yocohama

Port

394 345 330 330 319 318 317

43 Results Analysis

From the results table we can obtain the many results as following

① The main Green Port measures which are more important to improve port

competitiveness are Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system the indicator weights are 01702 01506 and

01371 among the 11 indicators

② In the Green Port construction Cost on amount of CO2 emission and CO2

emissions reduction policies are the restrictions indicators but the weight

of two indicators are not big 00319 and 00196 So effect on Green Port

construction to port competitiveness does have the weaken capacity but

not clearly strengthen more clearly Thus Green Port construction really

could improve the port competitiveness

48

③ In the case study traditional ports Rotterdam and Singapore Port give us

better examples on Green Port construction especially Rotterdam Port

④ Hongkong Busan and Yocohama Port all got a lower evaluation value

But in detail Hongkong and Yocohama Port got a lower on the port

facilities and rates and charges Busan Port got a higher on the port

facilities and rates and charges but a lower on the inland connection and

social circumstance

⑤ Shanghai Port doesnrsquot have Particular strength factors but the

comprehensive strength is not bad the same as LALB Port

49

Chapter 5 Conclusion

In this thesis the effects of Green Port construction for improving the port

competitiveness have been studied Under the definition of Green Port the

characteristics of Green Port and its effects has been shown by analysing the AHP

method which based on the questionary survey for Green Port specialists and port

officers

Follow the results of analysis on Green Port competitiveness AHP model

Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green ship certification system is

better for Green Port Construction welcome for shipping companies and citizens

who live around the port And in the analysis of Port competitiveness factors port

rates and charges always affects port competitiveness a lot As a trend inland

connection factor abstracts more attention of shipping companies

50

On the trend of port department each port should take a activity to adjust

strategy for improving its competitiveness Such as in the main ports evaluation

Busan port get a high value on port rates and charges and port facilities but as a

lower value on inland connection factor the final value is not as well as we look

forward In the evaluation of Singapore Port through it gets a lower value on rates

and charges higher value on inland connection and social circumstance causes the

final value are better So the Green Port Construction may be a trend in port

department

In the results of this thesis Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system are better solutions for Green Port Construction And

especially it can be verified that the port rates and charges always affects port

competitiveness Futhermore the investment for Green Port construction and its

effects have to be verified in the future

51

References

1 Hoyle B S and Smith J 1992 Transport and Development In Modern

transport geography edited by B S Hoyle R D Knowles (London Belhaven

Press)pp11-31

2 Beresford A K C De Souza A J R G and Pettit S J 2005 Stategic

development of liner shipping companies and terminal operators Ocean yearbook

19(Chicago 1L The University of Chicago Press) pp 732-750

3 Heaver T D 2002 Supply chain and logistics management implications for

liner shipping In The handbook of maritime economics and business edited by C

Grammenos (LondonLLP) pp 375-396

4 Park T E (2011) A Study on selection criteria of Green Port and evaluation of

major Korean port A masters thesis of graduate school of Incheon university

52

5 JeongBH (2009)Green port management policy directions in the green

growth era- The case of Gwangyang port in Republic of Korea Journal of Korea

Port Economic Association Vol25(3) p361-384

6 Lee J S Han N H(2009) A study on Green Port Revitalization According to

Air Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

7 Lee Y K Nan J W(2010)Green Logistics Policy Analysis and Implications

of Japan

8 Lee B S (2010)Tendency and Countermeasures on Green Logistics in Port

Logistics Company A masters thesis of graduate school of Korean Maritime

university

9 Lee J S (2009) A Study on Green Port Revitalization According to Air

Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

10 Zhang F Y Li Z Lu X J Yao X L(2008)Competitiveness of Inland

Ports Based on F-AHP

11 Port of Long Beach (2009) Green Port Policy wwwpolbcom

12 The port of Los Angeles wwwportoflosangelesorg

13

in Green Port Technology construction department measures and programs are

shown in following Table

Table231 the details of LALB Port Green Port Promotion Programs

Promotion Program

Heavy Equipment Truck

Heavy Equipment

Replace and Update Aging Facilities

Substitute Fuels and Clean Fuel Incentives

Budgetary for the Development of Substitute Fuels

Marine Vessels Tugs

Ship Speed Reduction within the Port

Electrical supply of parking in the Berth

Use low-sulfur fuel (supplementary motor)

Handling Equipment

Air Quality Monitoring

Measure ambient air pollution levels in the vicinity of

the Port

Include a number of real-time air quality measurements

On the restrict situation of heavy equipment trucks and others vessels must to

be replaced and rebuilt in order to minimum the emission of NOx And the trucks

which donrsquot reach the regulate standard do not allowed to get in the port These

regulations will help their owner to replace and update trucks and also set up a

replacement plan to 16000 aging trucks make the replace done by 2012 As

foundation repaired the cargo owner must to pay an addition tax about 20ft 35$

40ft 79$

14

In the maritime department the speed reduction incentive took action in

Jan2005 When ship entry into the port boundary speed must be reduced under

20 miles 12kont At the beginning the effect of this plan is very clearly so the

limitation may be raised to 40mile And AMP (Alternative Maritime Power ) is

encouraged to be built and developed as to ship use their engine and get GHG

emission

② New York- New Jersey Port

The New York- New Jersey Port Authority brought out environment policy on

CO2 emission reduction The main concepts as following first reduce PX SOX

3 each year and CO2 5 Second ship must utilize sulfur-low fuel as a

obligation Third AMP is provided Forth modern the unloading and loading

equipment must be built Fifth promote trucks replacement Sixth reform the ship

engine Seventh invent 9 billion dollars in the following 10 years Eighth invent

to all hybrid equipment (325) Ninth install the hybrid truck in AMPT and

NYCT

③ Seattle Port

15

In Seattle Port Air Environment Maritime Improvement plan has been

accepted in 2005 The plan includes first set up Puget Sound Maritime Air

Forum and make one AMP provide services for two tour ships second change

the diesel hybrid equipment into electric utilization Third use bio-diesel and

diesel catalyst and reduce the emission Forth emphasize the standard and plan of

truck minimum the idling time

Seattle Port Tacoma Port and Vancouver made a assignment and promote

ldquoNorthwest Ports Clean Air Strategyrdquo

④ Auckland Port

Auckland Port set up the aging replacement plan in 2008 and invent 20 milion

dollars gas emission should reach the level And cargo transport system in port

hinterland port authority and Air environment management committee make

cooperation and give an incentive to truck which use new clean technology

Table232 Short term and Long term Green Port Plans in Auckland Port

16

17

232 EU

Rotterdam Port

As the biggest Port in EU Rotterdam Port takes more affords in reducing the

CO2 emission Main programs are low carbon footprint AMP and so on The

limitation of CO2 emission reduces down 50 of 1990 by 2025

In July 2008 the authority of Rotterdam port gave international cooperation

with other ports an extra boost by organizing the World Ports Climate Conference

During this conference the authority of Rotterdam discussed possible ways in

which ports and business could reduce air pollution and CO2 emissions The

proposals the authority of Rotterdam was set out in a declaration which was

supported by all 55 port cities attending the conference The conference resulted

in five projects to improve air quality and reduce CO2 emissions The authority of

Rotterdam is behind the project to further elaborate an Environmental Ship Index

The Rotterdam Climate Initiative is a joint venture with the municipality of

Rotterdam DCMR Environmental Protection Agency Rijnmond and Deltalinqs

Common goal is to halve CO2 emissions in the region by 2025 in comparison with

1990 levels In connection with the Rotterdam Climate Initiative the port works

on (together with DCMR and others) creating an infrastructure for the capture

18

transport and storage of CO2 A business case presented in the summer of 2008 is

now being elaborated into a business plan The business case concludes that

Rotterdam can begin in 2015 with the capture transport and underground storage

of five million tons of CO2 per annum This means that the basic infrastructure

will then be in place for further growth in capture and storage to twenty million

tons in 2025

In 2008 a start was made on the development of a sustainability index for

activities relating to the P for Planet (environment) In 2009 it will further expand

the index to cover the P for People and the P for Profit In the first phase of the

sustainability index CO2 footprint sustainable purchasing sustainable building

and sustainable land allocation will be covered

233 Japan

① Tacoma Port

In the Tacoma Port there are some programs on protecting the air water and

soil environment

In the air protection department ldquoNorthwest Ports Clean Air Strategyrdquo

ldquoGreen Gateway for Traderdquo and ldquoTruck Programrdquo had brought out to against air

pollution The concepts include using ultra-low sulfur diesel bio-diesel and other

cleaner-burning fuels in cargo-handling equipment using low-sulfur distillate

19

fuels at berth adding ldquogreen designrdquo environmental features to ships including

diesel-electric motors that save up to 30 percent in fuel and significantly reduce

emissions setting targets to change older less-efficient truck engines installing

anti-idling devices on rail-switching engines as well as partnering on other

innovative technological advance

The Port of Tacomarsquos four dockside rail yards move cargo quickly and

efficiently from container terminals They also reduce the number of trucks on

city streets and highways Each full train that leaves the Port represents 250 to 300

trucks not on our roads reducing roadway congestion and diesel emissions The

lowest emission route to ship cargo from Asia to the US Midwest is through the

Puget Sound according to the results of a study by Herbert Engineering released

in May 2009

And in the land protection program there are successful clean projects open

spaces and future habitat restoration In 2007 the Port purchased about 70 acres

of open space known as Juliarsquos Gulch and Storey Pit located between the

Tideflats and residential Northeast Tacoma Monitor water quality system is in

utilization in the water department in Tacoma Port

② Tokyo Port

In the Tokyo Port Green Port programs are almost similar with Tacoma Port

e-RTGC (Rubber Tired Gantry Crane) the barge between Tokyo and Yocohama

20

which shorten international maritime container cargo transportation land distance

super eco-shipbuilding technology dissemination and promotion green business

certification operation and shippers and logistics companies support cooperation

③ Osaka Port and Hakata Port

AMP electrical power equipment and solar power equipment are in utilization in

Osaka Port E-RTGC and solar power of refrigerated container are in utilization in

the Hakata Port

234 Korea

In Busan Port a set of Green Port took implementation such as LNG truck

E-RTGC equipment utilization eco-friendly transport means conversion (rail

canal barge) and GHG emission reduction obligation Table233

21

ltTable 233gt Summary of the Main Port of Green Port Measures

COUNTRY PORT MEASURES

US

LALB Port

Green flag AMP discharge gas reduction obligation

recommends use of alternative fuels and clean fuel

funding for the development of alternative fuels facilities

by new engine development instead of NOx emissions

green truck program (reduce70-80) low-sulfur fuel

utilization restore and revitalize the Los Cerritos

Wetlands

New York

Port

AMP modernized facilities utilization high speed hybrid

yard

Auckland

Port

Incentives on the new cleaning technology containers

transportation system

Seattle Port

AMP green ship membership Tier 4 level reducing PM

by 1994 level Smart Way program Northwest Ports

Clean Air Strategy

EU Rotterdam

Port

Clean engine (barge) green ship membership carbon

footprint calculation cruise ship which under port

authority change to use low-sulfur fuel low emission

engine development and utilization Green Award AMP

ship recycling incentives

Japan

Tokyo Port

RTGC (Rubber Tired Gantry Crane) apply for the barge

between Tokyo and Yocohama shorten international

maritime container cargo transportation land distance

super eco-shipbuilding technology dissemination and

promotion green business certification operation

shippers and logistics companies support cooperation

Osaka Port AMP electrical power equipment solar power equipment

Hakata Port E-RTGC solar power utilization in refrigerated container

Korea Busan Port

LNG truck E-RTGC eco-friendly transport means

conversion (rail canal barge) GHG emission reduction

obligation

22

24 Green Port Indicators Research

As the previous section list shown Green Port measures and programs are

substantially the same

When a ship entry in the port boundary from voyage many ports give a

incentive on shifting and utilizing sulfur-low fuel and reducing the speed under

20 miles when the ship berth in the port the alternative maritime power are

provided which replace its power generation

Next in the cargo unloading and loading department the same with above

utilization of sulfur-low fuel and electrical equipment are promoted and

eco-driving education to driver is necessary what speed is fuel fully burning and

emission minimum point

In the cargo transport department in other words truck department the

replacement on aging trucks is popular in many ports aging trucks are prohibited

close to port at the same time an incentive or support function are provided on

aging replacement The automated equipments are recommended to utilize in the

Green Port like hybrid yard tractor And a perfect plan on truck running also could

reduce the idling time and against the emission of CO2

The details reference the following Table 241

23

Table241 Green Port measures in port each department

Emission reduction programs

Ship

department

Shipping

in the

port

boundary

Obligation on the utilization of sulfur-low fuel

Reform ship engine and utilize hybrid

Speed reduce in the port entrance(a off-shore fee

incentive)

Off-shore AMP

Shift utilization system of clean fuel

Unloading and loading

department

Obligation on the utilization of sulfur-low fuel

Replace electrical equipment

Eco-driving

Truck department Hybrid yard tractor utilization

Promote aging truck replacement

Minimum the idling time

Others LED light in the Port

Develop renew and recycle resource energy

The Green Port measures in this study are e-RTGC AMP AGV Green Ship

certification system incentives on the new clean technology Green Flag(speed

reduction incentive)eco-friendly transport means conversion joint distribution

the cost on account of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction polities and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

The details and definition on each Green Port measure and the relationship with

Port Competitiveness will be expressed in next chapter

24

Chapter 3 The Relationship between Port

Competitiveness and Green Port Construction

31 Port Competitiveness Literature Review

Although past studies on port selection models have focused on port selection

made by port facilities port services port rates and charge and location

Murphy made a survey between 534 shipping companies and port authorities in

1989 and between 1850 shipping companies and port authorities in 1992

Comparing with other papers Murphys got a survey among more widely

objects In his paper port selection(port competitiveness) was seen to affected by

facilities situation appropriate pilotage max ship entrance probability the

25

capability of handling non-regular cargos whether to provide information of ship

nationality or not and port services level

In French model (1979) there are two factors affecting the port selection (port

competitiveness) endogenous factor and exogenous factor In endogenous factors

there are adequacy and physical plant condition of terminal facilities terminal rate

and charges frequency and geographic coverage of ship and freight services the

capacity of connecting to inland rails or transport net and the services provides for

the shipping or logistics And exogenous factors included the size and economic

capacity of hinterland as a source exports or market for imports national

economic situation trade policy and support established by government the

situation at home and abroad

The same as Frenchs paper in Paters paper in 1990 there are endogenous and

exogenous factors too In endogenous there are the services provides for the

shipping or logistics capacity of terminal facilities situation and condition of

facilities operation strategies established by port authority convenience to utilize

And the political situation at home and abroad social change economic factor

stabilized labor and capital However in 2004 there is a tremendous change in

Peters new paper There are four parts multi-modal process interface transport

modes infrastructure Multi-model Process part includes ship entrance rapid

speed and accuracy shipper and shipping companies reactive operation flexibility

Interface includes labor power information technology and so on And there are

26

ship calls frequency and amount of fleet factors in the transport modes part In the

infrastructure part includes port facility equipments and so on

Port facilities rates and charges services inland situation and social

circumstance factors affect the port selection and competitiveness a lot from the

research until 1992 by Murphy And in Lirn and Pater research 2003-2004 the

new and detail factors are shown to us

We can clearly see the contents in next table

27

Table 311 Prevention literature research results

Influence factors

French

(1979)

Endogenous

port facilities port rate and charges calls frequency port services

port connection with inland

Exogenous

economic size of hinterland national economic situation trade

policy home and abroad situation

Willingale

(1982)

voyage distance economy size entrance to port and route port

facilities max ship entrance probability port operation rates and

charges port authority scale of port

Slack

(1985)

cost of inland transportation port proximity ship demurrage

multi-transport

Peter

(1990)

Endogenous

port facilities condition of facilities operation strategies

convenience to utilize

Exogenous

political situation social change economic factor stabilized labor

and capital

UNCTAD

(1992)

port facilities services location level of financial industry

information communication system social circumstances economic

stability

Murphy

(1992)

facilities situation appropriate pilotage max ship entrance

probability the capability of handling non-regular cargos whether to

provide information of ship nationality or not port services level

Lirn

(2003-2004)

physical and technologic facilities geopolitical location port

operation and management shipping and terminal cost

Peter

(2004)

Multi-modal Process

ship entrance rapid speed and accuracy shipper and shipping

companies reactive operation flexibility

Interface labor and capital

Transport modes ship calls frequency and amount of fleet factors

28

And there are many experts and scholars research for the influence factors to

port selection and competitiveness in Korea The specific content follows table5

Table 312 Literature research in Korean academia

Influence factors

Jeon Il-su (1992) location facilities charges service level (EDI) terminal operation

port authority

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

( 1993 )

location facilities throughput charges service operation

situation

Kim Hak-so

(1993)

export shipping amount of annual cost of each ton of cargo

marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km of

cargo loading time

import marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km

of cargo amount of liner ship

Yeo Gi-tae (1996) location facilities throughput charge service operation situation

Ha Dong-u amp

Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

location facilities service level logistics charges environment of

logistics service

Yeo Gi-tae (1999) location facilities throughput charges service

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

throughput quay length yard area GNP

Kum Jong-su

(2001)

distance between port and cargo site terminal facilities service

the capacity of multi-transport capacity of cargo handling

administrative service rates and charges of inland transport

congestion

Yeo Gi-tae (2002) location throughput facilities service level

Kim Jin-gu (2002) port facilities location cargo amount rates and charges services

29

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005)

voyage degree to attract cargo cargo handling cost amount of

handling cargo connection to inland service reliability location

berth availability quay length feeder network depth

transshipment volumes cargo security profitability

offing degree to attract cargo berth availability cargo handling

cost transshipment volumes

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005)

cargo handling amount port facilities location rates and charges

level of service

Heo Yun-su

(2005)

port facilities rates and charges services marketing geopolitics

location economic and social circumstance

Kim Geun-seop

(2007)

port services facilities cargo handling amount location cost

productivity factor global factor

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) rates and charges services port characteristics

Many experts and scholars make a research on port selection and

competitiveness recently But the factors selection criteria are difference

Nevertheless the main factors are facilities services cost and so on

Therefore port competitiveness factors which chose in this study are port

facilities port services port rates and charges and social circumstance

However the main factors are not the whole factors any more more and more

detail factors and characteristic factors appearance Port selection and

competitiveness factors have changed And the development content is introduced

in next part

30

32 Port Competitiveness Development Tree

As mentioned above port facilities port rates and charges and port location are

the basic factors in the port selection and competitiveness

From the following table we can discover that first one facilities rates and

charges and location are the most important factor in port selection and

competitiveness second one the importance of social circumstance turns larger

inland connection is necessary all the time

Table 321 Main factor in the Pretentious Research

31

port facilities rates and

charges

inland

connection

social

circumstance location

French (1979) radic radic radic

Wiliingale (1982) radic radic

Slack (1985) radic

Pater (1990) radic radic

UNCTAD (1992) radic radic radic

Murphy(1992) radic

Jeon Il-su (1992) radic radic radic

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

(1993)

radic radic radic

Kim Hak-so

(1993) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1996) radic radic radic

Ha Dong-u

amp Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1998) radic radic radic

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

radic

Kum Jong-su

(2001) radic radic radic radic

Kim Jin-gu(2002) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(2002) radic radic

Lirn(2003-2004) radic radic radic

Pater(2004) radic

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005) radic radic radic

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005) radic radic radic

Heo Yun-su

(2005) radic radic radic radic

Kim Geun-seop

(2007) radic radic radic radic

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) radic

32

33 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green

Port Construction

Following the research above Port facilities rates and charges inland

connection and social circumstance are chose in this study port selection and

competitiveness department

e-RTGC Electric rubber tired gantry crane is a mobile gantry crane used for

stacking intermodal containers within the stacking areas of a container terminal

e-RTGC are used at container terminals and container storage yards to straddling

multiple lanes of railroad and container storage or when maximum storage

density in the container stack is desired

AMP is shorted for Alternative Marine Power and Itrsquos a facility which

provides the electric system in the land for ship which entry in the port The

facility can reduce emissions which ship get entrance in the port

AGV is a mobile robot that follows markers or wires in the floor or uses

vision or lasers They are most often used in industrial applications to move

materials around a manufacturing facility or a warehouse Automatic Guided

Vehicle systems work around-the-clock making continuous flow and just-in-time

delivery easier to achieve Application of the automatic guided vehicle has broade

33

ned during the late 20th century and they are no longer restricted to industrial

environments

The e-RTGC AMP and AGV are the new clean facilities and equipments in the

Green Port they donrsquot reduce the efficiency of handling cargo and they also

reduce the CO2 emission account

Green ship certification system if a ship utilizes clean and CO2 emission

reduction technology on the ship building adds equipment and management and

son on certification would be received And the port authority gives some

incentive and preferential treatment among 45 ports Such as a better schedule is

provided for green membership ship priority in handing cargo and discount on

entrance fee

Incentives on the new cleaning technology There are two expressions about

this measure one is that the port authority give a incentive to ship which have a

great utilization on the new cleaning technology and the other one is that

environment provide many incentives to the authority which utilize the new

cleaning technology in the port such as LED street lamp solar power cranes

Green flag The Green Flag incentive program was set up to encourage ships to

slow down in order to improve air quality The Green Flag program provides

approximately $2 million a year in discounts for vessel operators who slow their

ships to 12 knots (22kmh) or less within 20miles (32km) of the harbor

34

According to the Port the Green Flag program reduced air pollution by 600tons in

2007 and is expected to do better in 2008

All of Green ship certification system incentives on the new cleaning

technology and Green Flag are incentives provided for users of port and aimed at

reduce port rates and charges So the 3 measures belong to affect port rates and

charges

Eco-friendly transport means conversion Eco-friendly means of transport are

much accounted of green port for example railway discharge less GHG emission

than truck barge with a clean engine among the river and inshore canal

Joint distribution joint distribution is a collaborative system which port

provides among many logistics companies It can make the cargo handling speed

rapidly and reduce cargo storage time for CO2 emission reducing such as

refrigerated container In an addition it also makes the logistics companies

transport more efficient

Cost on amount of CO2 emission differenced from other port the cost on

amount of CO2 is included in the port cost The cost aims to reduce the CO2

emission directly

CO2 emission reduction policies compared with other traditional port Green

Port gives more cost discount and incentives but in an addition there are many

policies on CO2 emission restriction Such as aging trucks restrictions in inland

transport department ship entry speed reduced and fuel changed in the ship

35

department and so on Whether these restriction policies constrain port

development or not and the degree of these policies constrain port development

will be explain by the AHP results

Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors some ports in the

western countries are opened as a travel place for visitors so as to change the

polluted impress and raise the position in our heart

Cost on amount of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction policies and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors can affect the social

circumstance factor Whether these measures can or not improve the social

circumstance and port competitiveness we have to see the next calculation and

results

36

Chapter 4 The Green Port Competitiveness

Analysis

41 The Green Port Competitiveness Model by AHP

The AHP is one multi-criteria decision making method which has been

extensively applied to a variety of decision-making situations The multi-criteria

techniques are considered to be a promising framework for evaluation of

decision-making factors since they have the potential to take into account

conflicting multidimensional incommensurable and uncertain effects of

decisions explicitly

In order to apply the AHP method a hierarchical decision schema was

constructed by decomposing the decision problem into its decision elements

37

After that the importance or preferences of the decision elements are examined in

a pair-wise comparison to the elements in the hierarchy The parameters are

estimated using pair-wise comparisons between the importance of the attribute or

decision element in the function using data made by each responder Making

comparisons is a question of which of the two attributes is more import as well as

how much more important

Follow these theories the Green Port Competitiveness Model choose factors as

follow in port competitiveness factors part there are port facilities port rates and

charges inland connection social circumstance in Green Port construction part

there are e-RTGC AMP AGV green ship certification system green flag

incentives on the new cleaning technology eco-friendly transport means

conversion joint distribution CO2 emission reduction policies cost on amount of

CO2 emission beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

38

Figure 41 Green Port Competitiveness AHP model

Follow the Green Port Competitiveness AHP as shown we set a questionnaire

survey to many experts scholars working in logistics system area And we got 15

ones and 14 ones results are believable and integrated

42 Green Port Competitiveness Analysis

39

The key to construction of the factors which affects the port competitiveness

is to determine the conceptual model The selection of the factors directly affects

the evaluation of the result In order to ensure the accuracy objectivity and

practicality of evaluation results the following basic principles must be followed

when selecting factors systematic principles the principle of universal

comparability practical principle and goal-oriented principle In view of the

foregoing the competitiveness which affected by Green Port construction model

is made The analysis follows established principles of port competitiveness

evaluation taking into account the characteristics and functions of the port as well

as port facilities port services port rates and charges ship entrance inland

connection social circumstances and so on

(1) Port facilities

e-RTGC U11 AMP U12 AGV U13

(2) Port rates and charges

Green ship certification system U21 Incentives on the new clean

technology U22 Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

(3) Inland connection

Eco-friendly means of transport U31 Joint distribution U32

(4) Social circumstances

40

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41 CO2 emission reduction policies

U42 Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors U43

Table 421 Details of Level I and Level II values

Level I

indicators Symbol Level II indicators Symbol

Port facilities A1

e-RTGC U11

AMP U12

AGV U13

Port rates and

charges A2

Green ship certification system U21

Incentives on the new clean technology U22

Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

Inland

connection A3

Eco-friendly means of transport U31

Joint distribution U32

Social

circumstances A4

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41

CO2 emissions reduction policies U42

Beautiful environment construction in inner

harbors U43

41

I Determination of level I indicator weights

As the ports competitiveness evaluation indicators at this level are complex

and the elements are not easily quantified AHP is adopted to determine the

indicator weights with the basic steps as follows

(1) Establish a comparative judgment matrix The comparative judgment

matrix is obtained through comparing contributed proportion of multiple

indicators to the overall target by the judgment scale wherein the fuzzy

judgment number introduced is 1 3 5 7 and 9 and the reciprocal of

such number indicates the important degree of one element relatively to

another The results are shown in next table

Table 422 Comparison matrix of level I indicators

A1 A2 A3 A4

A1 1 15 13 3

A2 5 1 3 7

A3 3 13 1 5

A4 13 17 15 1

(2) Calculate the characteristic vector of the comparative judgment matrix

which refers to the weighted vector of the indicator The writer adopts

42

the geometric method to calculate the characteristic vector The

calculated result is as follows

ω=(012 0560 026 006)T λmax=418 It can be obtained from the table

RI=09 Wherein ω is the characteristic vector corresponding to the

maximum characteristic value λmax of the comparative judgment matrix

namely the weighted vector of the indicator RI is the average

consistency indicator as shown in following table

Table423 Average random consistency indicator RI

Matrix Order

RI

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

0 0 058 09 112 124 132 141

Matrix Order

RI

9 10 11 12 13 14 15

145 149 152 154 156 158 159

(3) Conduct consistency check on the comparative judgment matrix Adopt

the random consistency proportion CR to judge the consistency of the

comparative judgment matrix According to CI= (λmax -n)(n-1) and

CR=CIRI it can be obtained through calculation CR=007lt01 Thus

this comparative judgment matrix has a satisfactory consistency and the

indicator weight coefficient calculated through this matrix is acceptable

43

II Determination of level II indicator weights

The data at this level are the details of level Ⅰ indicator The judgment

matrix obtained through comparing multiple sub-indicators under Level Ⅰ

indicators is adopted to determine the weights of sub-indicators under each

indicator one by one The specific steps are as follows

(1) The experts score the weights within the given range To determine the

weights of several small indicators under the same big indicator it is

supposed that the score of small indicator ｋ under the indicator j made

by the expert i is Xijk wherein i=12n n is the total number of

experts ј=12m m is the total number of LevelⅡ indicator к

=12Oj Oj is the number of small indicators under the big indicator ј

іјк IJK LRC l I j k

(2) The credit rating of the expert і is l l =1 2 3 l =1 indicates this expert

is quite familiar with the evaluated contents l =2 indicator this expert is

44

with the evaluated contents l =3 indicates this expert is not quite familiar

with the evaluated contents yi1 is the=08 yi2 =05 and yi3=1

(3) The comprehensive evaluation score of small indicator l under the

indicator j is as follows

(4) The formula for normalization processing of indicator weights is as

follows and the absolute weight of the indicator set is marked as

q=(q1q2q11)

(5) Because of the same justification and principle we donrsquot give the detail

about the calculation The same with the level Ⅰ calculation we

manipulation data one by one and get 14 results And obtain the average

45

results by weighted average method The results detail as Table for the

final weights of Level-Ⅱ evaluation indicators

Above the calculation process and method are just one of data from the

questionable surveys In this study the final results are got from the

weighted average by the results of each questionable survey

The final results are shown as Table424

Table424 Indicator weights table of indicator system

Level I

indicators Weight LevelⅡ indicators

Relative

weight

Absolute

weight

Importance

percentage

Port Facilities

A1 02735

e-RTGC U11 05506 01506 1506

AMP U12 01648 00451 451

AGV U13 02826 00773 773

Port Rates and

Charges A2

02902

Green ship certification s

ystem U21 04724 01371 1371

Incentives on the new

clean technology U22 02871 00833 833

Green Flag (speed

reduction incentive)U23 02405 00698 698

Inland

connection A3

02865

Eco-friendly means of

transport U31 05942 01702 1702

Joint distribution U32 04058 01163 1163

Social

environmentA4 00863

Cost on amount of CO2

emission U41 03698 00319 319

CO2 emissions reduction

policies U42 02273 00196 196

Beautiful environment

construction in inner

harbors U43

04029 00348 348

46

III Case study

In the questionable survey we also got the mark of Green Port measures

evaluation value of many main ports such as Singapore Port Shanghai Port

Hongkong Port Busan Port LALB Port Rotterdam Port and Yocohama Port

The highest mark is 5 and lowest one is 1

Table425 Evaluation value of many main ports

Singapore

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

LALB

Port

Rotterdam

Port

Yocohama

Port

Port facilities 38000 36000 34000 38182 38000 42000 32000

Port rates and

charges 32000 36000 31000 35455 32000 39000 33000

Inland

connection 39000 34545 35000 29091 35000 45000 36000

Social

circumstance 42000 32727 41000 32000 38000 42727 36000

With the Green Port and Port competitiveness indicator weights results these

ports got the final evaluation value

47

Table426 Final evaluation value on main ports Green Port measures and

competitiveness

Rotterdam

Port

Singapore

Port

LALB

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

Yocohama

Port

394 345 330 330 319 318 317

43 Results Analysis

From the results table we can obtain the many results as following

① The main Green Port measures which are more important to improve port

competitiveness are Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system the indicator weights are 01702 01506 and

01371 among the 11 indicators

② In the Green Port construction Cost on amount of CO2 emission and CO2

emissions reduction policies are the restrictions indicators but the weight

of two indicators are not big 00319 and 00196 So effect on Green Port

construction to port competitiveness does have the weaken capacity but

not clearly strengthen more clearly Thus Green Port construction really

could improve the port competitiveness

48

③ In the case study traditional ports Rotterdam and Singapore Port give us

better examples on Green Port construction especially Rotterdam Port

④ Hongkong Busan and Yocohama Port all got a lower evaluation value

But in detail Hongkong and Yocohama Port got a lower on the port

facilities and rates and charges Busan Port got a higher on the port

facilities and rates and charges but a lower on the inland connection and

social circumstance

⑤ Shanghai Port doesnrsquot have Particular strength factors but the

comprehensive strength is not bad the same as LALB Port

49

Chapter 5 Conclusion

In this thesis the effects of Green Port construction for improving the port

competitiveness have been studied Under the definition of Green Port the

characteristics of Green Port and its effects has been shown by analysing the AHP

method which based on the questionary survey for Green Port specialists and port

officers

Follow the results of analysis on Green Port competitiveness AHP model

Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green ship certification system is

better for Green Port Construction welcome for shipping companies and citizens

who live around the port And in the analysis of Port competitiveness factors port

rates and charges always affects port competitiveness a lot As a trend inland

connection factor abstracts more attention of shipping companies

50

On the trend of port department each port should take a activity to adjust

strategy for improving its competitiveness Such as in the main ports evaluation

Busan port get a high value on port rates and charges and port facilities but as a

lower value on inland connection factor the final value is not as well as we look

forward In the evaluation of Singapore Port through it gets a lower value on rates

and charges higher value on inland connection and social circumstance causes the

final value are better So the Green Port Construction may be a trend in port

department

In the results of this thesis Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system are better solutions for Green Port Construction And

especially it can be verified that the port rates and charges always affects port

competitiveness Futhermore the investment for Green Port construction and its

effects have to be verified in the future

51

References

1 Hoyle B S and Smith J 1992 Transport and Development In Modern

transport geography edited by B S Hoyle R D Knowles (London Belhaven

Press)pp11-31

2 Beresford A K C De Souza A J R G and Pettit S J 2005 Stategic

development of liner shipping companies and terminal operators Ocean yearbook

19(Chicago 1L The University of Chicago Press) pp 732-750

3 Heaver T D 2002 Supply chain and logistics management implications for

liner shipping In The handbook of maritime economics and business edited by C

Grammenos (LondonLLP) pp 375-396

4 Park T E (2011) A Study on selection criteria of Green Port and evaluation of

major Korean port A masters thesis of graduate school of Incheon university

52

5 JeongBH (2009)Green port management policy directions in the green

growth era- The case of Gwangyang port in Republic of Korea Journal of Korea

Port Economic Association Vol25(3) p361-384

6 Lee J S Han N H(2009) A study on Green Port Revitalization According to

Air Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

7 Lee Y K Nan J W(2010)Green Logistics Policy Analysis and Implications

of Japan

8 Lee B S (2010)Tendency and Countermeasures on Green Logistics in Port

Logistics Company A masters thesis of graduate school of Korean Maritime

university

9 Lee J S (2009) A Study on Green Port Revitalization According to Air

Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

10 Zhang F Y Li Z Lu X J Yao X L(2008)Competitiveness of Inland

Ports Based on F-AHP

11 Port of Long Beach (2009) Green Port Policy wwwpolbcom

12 The port of Los Angeles wwwportoflosangelesorg

14

In the maritime department the speed reduction incentive took action in

Jan2005 When ship entry into the port boundary speed must be reduced under

20 miles 12kont At the beginning the effect of this plan is very clearly so the

limitation may be raised to 40mile And AMP (Alternative Maritime Power ) is

encouraged to be built and developed as to ship use their engine and get GHG

emission

② New York- New Jersey Port

The New York- New Jersey Port Authority brought out environment policy on

CO2 emission reduction The main concepts as following first reduce PX SOX

3 each year and CO2 5 Second ship must utilize sulfur-low fuel as a

obligation Third AMP is provided Forth modern the unloading and loading

equipment must be built Fifth promote trucks replacement Sixth reform the ship

engine Seventh invent 9 billion dollars in the following 10 years Eighth invent

to all hybrid equipment (325) Ninth install the hybrid truck in AMPT and

NYCT

③ Seattle Port

15

In Seattle Port Air Environment Maritime Improvement plan has been

accepted in 2005 The plan includes first set up Puget Sound Maritime Air

Forum and make one AMP provide services for two tour ships second change

the diesel hybrid equipment into electric utilization Third use bio-diesel and

diesel catalyst and reduce the emission Forth emphasize the standard and plan of

truck minimum the idling time

Seattle Port Tacoma Port and Vancouver made a assignment and promote

ldquoNorthwest Ports Clean Air Strategyrdquo

④ Auckland Port

Auckland Port set up the aging replacement plan in 2008 and invent 20 milion

dollars gas emission should reach the level And cargo transport system in port

hinterland port authority and Air environment management committee make

cooperation and give an incentive to truck which use new clean technology

Table232 Short term and Long term Green Port Plans in Auckland Port

16

17

232 EU

Rotterdam Port

As the biggest Port in EU Rotterdam Port takes more affords in reducing the

CO2 emission Main programs are low carbon footprint AMP and so on The

limitation of CO2 emission reduces down 50 of 1990 by 2025

In July 2008 the authority of Rotterdam port gave international cooperation

with other ports an extra boost by organizing the World Ports Climate Conference

During this conference the authority of Rotterdam discussed possible ways in

which ports and business could reduce air pollution and CO2 emissions The

proposals the authority of Rotterdam was set out in a declaration which was

supported by all 55 port cities attending the conference The conference resulted

in five projects to improve air quality and reduce CO2 emissions The authority of

Rotterdam is behind the project to further elaborate an Environmental Ship Index

The Rotterdam Climate Initiative is a joint venture with the municipality of

Rotterdam DCMR Environmental Protection Agency Rijnmond and Deltalinqs

Common goal is to halve CO2 emissions in the region by 2025 in comparison with

1990 levels In connection with the Rotterdam Climate Initiative the port works

on (together with DCMR and others) creating an infrastructure for the capture

18

transport and storage of CO2 A business case presented in the summer of 2008 is

now being elaborated into a business plan The business case concludes that

Rotterdam can begin in 2015 with the capture transport and underground storage

of five million tons of CO2 per annum This means that the basic infrastructure

will then be in place for further growth in capture and storage to twenty million

tons in 2025

In 2008 a start was made on the development of a sustainability index for

activities relating to the P for Planet (environment) In 2009 it will further expand

the index to cover the P for People and the P for Profit In the first phase of the

sustainability index CO2 footprint sustainable purchasing sustainable building

and sustainable land allocation will be covered

233 Japan

① Tacoma Port

In the Tacoma Port there are some programs on protecting the air water and

soil environment

In the air protection department ldquoNorthwest Ports Clean Air Strategyrdquo

ldquoGreen Gateway for Traderdquo and ldquoTruck Programrdquo had brought out to against air

pollution The concepts include using ultra-low sulfur diesel bio-diesel and other

cleaner-burning fuels in cargo-handling equipment using low-sulfur distillate

19

fuels at berth adding ldquogreen designrdquo environmental features to ships including

diesel-electric motors that save up to 30 percent in fuel and significantly reduce

emissions setting targets to change older less-efficient truck engines installing

anti-idling devices on rail-switching engines as well as partnering on other

innovative technological advance

The Port of Tacomarsquos four dockside rail yards move cargo quickly and

efficiently from container terminals They also reduce the number of trucks on

city streets and highways Each full train that leaves the Port represents 250 to 300

trucks not on our roads reducing roadway congestion and diesel emissions The

lowest emission route to ship cargo from Asia to the US Midwest is through the

Puget Sound according to the results of a study by Herbert Engineering released

in May 2009

And in the land protection program there are successful clean projects open

spaces and future habitat restoration In 2007 the Port purchased about 70 acres

of open space known as Juliarsquos Gulch and Storey Pit located between the

Tideflats and residential Northeast Tacoma Monitor water quality system is in

utilization in the water department in Tacoma Port

② Tokyo Port

In the Tokyo Port Green Port programs are almost similar with Tacoma Port

e-RTGC (Rubber Tired Gantry Crane) the barge between Tokyo and Yocohama

20

which shorten international maritime container cargo transportation land distance

super eco-shipbuilding technology dissemination and promotion green business

certification operation and shippers and logistics companies support cooperation

③ Osaka Port and Hakata Port

AMP electrical power equipment and solar power equipment are in utilization in

Osaka Port E-RTGC and solar power of refrigerated container are in utilization in

the Hakata Port

234 Korea

In Busan Port a set of Green Port took implementation such as LNG truck

E-RTGC equipment utilization eco-friendly transport means conversion (rail

canal barge) and GHG emission reduction obligation Table233

21

ltTable 233gt Summary of the Main Port of Green Port Measures

COUNTRY PORT MEASURES

US

LALB Port

Green flag AMP discharge gas reduction obligation

recommends use of alternative fuels and clean fuel

funding for the development of alternative fuels facilities

by new engine development instead of NOx emissions

green truck program (reduce70-80) low-sulfur fuel

utilization restore and revitalize the Los Cerritos

Wetlands

New York

Port

AMP modernized facilities utilization high speed hybrid

yard

Auckland

Port

Incentives on the new cleaning technology containers

transportation system

Seattle Port

AMP green ship membership Tier 4 level reducing PM

by 1994 level Smart Way program Northwest Ports

Clean Air Strategy

EU Rotterdam

Port

Clean engine (barge) green ship membership carbon

footprint calculation cruise ship which under port

authority change to use low-sulfur fuel low emission

engine development and utilization Green Award AMP

ship recycling incentives

Japan

Tokyo Port

RTGC (Rubber Tired Gantry Crane) apply for the barge

between Tokyo and Yocohama shorten international

maritime container cargo transportation land distance

super eco-shipbuilding technology dissemination and

promotion green business certification operation

shippers and logistics companies support cooperation

Osaka Port AMP electrical power equipment solar power equipment

Hakata Port E-RTGC solar power utilization in refrigerated container

Korea Busan Port

LNG truck E-RTGC eco-friendly transport means

conversion (rail canal barge) GHG emission reduction

obligation

22

24 Green Port Indicators Research

As the previous section list shown Green Port measures and programs are

substantially the same

When a ship entry in the port boundary from voyage many ports give a

incentive on shifting and utilizing sulfur-low fuel and reducing the speed under

20 miles when the ship berth in the port the alternative maritime power are

provided which replace its power generation

Next in the cargo unloading and loading department the same with above

utilization of sulfur-low fuel and electrical equipment are promoted and

eco-driving education to driver is necessary what speed is fuel fully burning and

emission minimum point

In the cargo transport department in other words truck department the

replacement on aging trucks is popular in many ports aging trucks are prohibited

close to port at the same time an incentive or support function are provided on

aging replacement The automated equipments are recommended to utilize in the

Green Port like hybrid yard tractor And a perfect plan on truck running also could

reduce the idling time and against the emission of CO2

The details reference the following Table 241

23

Table241 Green Port measures in port each department

Emission reduction programs

Ship

department

Shipping

in the

port

boundary

Obligation on the utilization of sulfur-low fuel

Reform ship engine and utilize hybrid

Speed reduce in the port entrance(a off-shore fee

incentive)

Off-shore AMP

Shift utilization system of clean fuel

Unloading and loading

department

Obligation on the utilization of sulfur-low fuel

Replace electrical equipment

Eco-driving

Truck department Hybrid yard tractor utilization

Promote aging truck replacement

Minimum the idling time

Others LED light in the Port

Develop renew and recycle resource energy

The Green Port measures in this study are e-RTGC AMP AGV Green Ship

certification system incentives on the new clean technology Green Flag(speed

reduction incentive)eco-friendly transport means conversion joint distribution

the cost on account of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction polities and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

The details and definition on each Green Port measure and the relationship with

Port Competitiveness will be expressed in next chapter

24

Chapter 3 The Relationship between Port

Competitiveness and Green Port Construction

31 Port Competitiveness Literature Review

Although past studies on port selection models have focused on port selection

made by port facilities port services port rates and charge and location

Murphy made a survey between 534 shipping companies and port authorities in

1989 and between 1850 shipping companies and port authorities in 1992

Comparing with other papers Murphys got a survey among more widely

objects In his paper port selection(port competitiveness) was seen to affected by

facilities situation appropriate pilotage max ship entrance probability the

25

capability of handling non-regular cargos whether to provide information of ship

nationality or not and port services level

In French model (1979) there are two factors affecting the port selection (port

competitiveness) endogenous factor and exogenous factor In endogenous factors

there are adequacy and physical plant condition of terminal facilities terminal rate

and charges frequency and geographic coverage of ship and freight services the

capacity of connecting to inland rails or transport net and the services provides for

the shipping or logistics And exogenous factors included the size and economic

capacity of hinterland as a source exports or market for imports national

economic situation trade policy and support established by government the

situation at home and abroad

The same as Frenchs paper in Paters paper in 1990 there are endogenous and

exogenous factors too In endogenous there are the services provides for the

shipping or logistics capacity of terminal facilities situation and condition of

facilities operation strategies established by port authority convenience to utilize

And the political situation at home and abroad social change economic factor

stabilized labor and capital However in 2004 there is a tremendous change in

Peters new paper There are four parts multi-modal process interface transport

modes infrastructure Multi-model Process part includes ship entrance rapid

speed and accuracy shipper and shipping companies reactive operation flexibility

Interface includes labor power information technology and so on And there are

26

ship calls frequency and amount of fleet factors in the transport modes part In the

infrastructure part includes port facility equipments and so on

Port facilities rates and charges services inland situation and social

circumstance factors affect the port selection and competitiveness a lot from the

research until 1992 by Murphy And in Lirn and Pater research 2003-2004 the

new and detail factors are shown to us

We can clearly see the contents in next table

27

Table 311 Prevention literature research results

Influence factors

French

(1979)

Endogenous

port facilities port rate and charges calls frequency port services

port connection with inland

Exogenous

economic size of hinterland national economic situation trade

policy home and abroad situation

Willingale

(1982)

voyage distance economy size entrance to port and route port

facilities max ship entrance probability port operation rates and

charges port authority scale of port

Slack

(1985)

cost of inland transportation port proximity ship demurrage

multi-transport

Peter

(1990)

Endogenous

port facilities condition of facilities operation strategies

convenience to utilize

Exogenous

political situation social change economic factor stabilized labor

and capital

UNCTAD

(1992)

port facilities services location level of financial industry

information communication system social circumstances economic

stability

Murphy

(1992)

facilities situation appropriate pilotage max ship entrance

probability the capability of handling non-regular cargos whether to

provide information of ship nationality or not port services level

Lirn

(2003-2004)

physical and technologic facilities geopolitical location port

operation and management shipping and terminal cost

Peter

(2004)

Multi-modal Process

ship entrance rapid speed and accuracy shipper and shipping

companies reactive operation flexibility

Interface labor and capital

Transport modes ship calls frequency and amount of fleet factors

28

And there are many experts and scholars research for the influence factors to

port selection and competitiveness in Korea The specific content follows table5

Table 312 Literature research in Korean academia

Influence factors

Jeon Il-su (1992) location facilities charges service level (EDI) terminal operation

port authority

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

( 1993 )

location facilities throughput charges service operation

situation

Kim Hak-so

(1993)

export shipping amount of annual cost of each ton of cargo

marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km of

cargo loading time

import marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km

of cargo amount of liner ship

Yeo Gi-tae (1996) location facilities throughput charge service operation situation

Ha Dong-u amp

Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

location facilities service level logistics charges environment of

logistics service

Yeo Gi-tae (1999) location facilities throughput charges service

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

throughput quay length yard area GNP

Kum Jong-su

(2001)

distance between port and cargo site terminal facilities service

the capacity of multi-transport capacity of cargo handling

administrative service rates and charges of inland transport

congestion

Yeo Gi-tae (2002) location throughput facilities service level

Kim Jin-gu (2002) port facilities location cargo amount rates and charges services

29

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005)

voyage degree to attract cargo cargo handling cost amount of

handling cargo connection to inland service reliability location

berth availability quay length feeder network depth

transshipment volumes cargo security profitability

offing degree to attract cargo berth availability cargo handling

cost transshipment volumes

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005)

cargo handling amount port facilities location rates and charges

level of service

Heo Yun-su

(2005)

port facilities rates and charges services marketing geopolitics

location economic and social circumstance

Kim Geun-seop

(2007)

port services facilities cargo handling amount location cost

productivity factor global factor

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) rates and charges services port characteristics

Many experts and scholars make a research on port selection and

competitiveness recently But the factors selection criteria are difference

Nevertheless the main factors are facilities services cost and so on

Therefore port competitiveness factors which chose in this study are port

facilities port services port rates and charges and social circumstance

However the main factors are not the whole factors any more more and more

detail factors and characteristic factors appearance Port selection and

competitiveness factors have changed And the development content is introduced

in next part

30

32 Port Competitiveness Development Tree

As mentioned above port facilities port rates and charges and port location are

the basic factors in the port selection and competitiveness

From the following table we can discover that first one facilities rates and

charges and location are the most important factor in port selection and

competitiveness second one the importance of social circumstance turns larger

inland connection is necessary all the time

Table 321 Main factor in the Pretentious Research

31

port facilities rates and

charges

inland

connection

social

circumstance location

French (1979) radic radic radic

Wiliingale (1982) radic radic

Slack (1985) radic

Pater (1990) radic radic

UNCTAD (1992) radic radic radic

Murphy(1992) radic

Jeon Il-su (1992) radic radic radic

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

(1993)

radic radic radic

Kim Hak-so

(1993) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1996) radic radic radic

Ha Dong-u

amp Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1998) radic radic radic

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

radic

Kum Jong-su

(2001) radic radic radic radic

Kim Jin-gu(2002) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(2002) radic radic

Lirn(2003-2004) radic radic radic

Pater(2004) radic

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005) radic radic radic

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005) radic radic radic

Heo Yun-su

(2005) radic radic radic radic

Kim Geun-seop

(2007) radic radic radic radic

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) radic

32

33 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green

Port Construction

Following the research above Port facilities rates and charges inland

connection and social circumstance are chose in this study port selection and

competitiveness department

e-RTGC Electric rubber tired gantry crane is a mobile gantry crane used for

stacking intermodal containers within the stacking areas of a container terminal

e-RTGC are used at container terminals and container storage yards to straddling

multiple lanes of railroad and container storage or when maximum storage

density in the container stack is desired

AMP is shorted for Alternative Marine Power and Itrsquos a facility which

provides the electric system in the land for ship which entry in the port The

facility can reduce emissions which ship get entrance in the port

AGV is a mobile robot that follows markers or wires in the floor or uses

vision or lasers They are most often used in industrial applications to move

materials around a manufacturing facility or a warehouse Automatic Guided

Vehicle systems work around-the-clock making continuous flow and just-in-time

delivery easier to achieve Application of the automatic guided vehicle has broade

33

ned during the late 20th century and they are no longer restricted to industrial

environments

The e-RTGC AMP and AGV are the new clean facilities and equipments in the

Green Port they donrsquot reduce the efficiency of handling cargo and they also

reduce the CO2 emission account

Green ship certification system if a ship utilizes clean and CO2 emission

reduction technology on the ship building adds equipment and management and

son on certification would be received And the port authority gives some

incentive and preferential treatment among 45 ports Such as a better schedule is

provided for green membership ship priority in handing cargo and discount on

entrance fee

Incentives on the new cleaning technology There are two expressions about

this measure one is that the port authority give a incentive to ship which have a

great utilization on the new cleaning technology and the other one is that

environment provide many incentives to the authority which utilize the new

cleaning technology in the port such as LED street lamp solar power cranes

Green flag The Green Flag incentive program was set up to encourage ships to

slow down in order to improve air quality The Green Flag program provides

approximately $2 million a year in discounts for vessel operators who slow their

ships to 12 knots (22kmh) or less within 20miles (32km) of the harbor

34

According to the Port the Green Flag program reduced air pollution by 600tons in

2007 and is expected to do better in 2008

All of Green ship certification system incentives on the new cleaning

technology and Green Flag are incentives provided for users of port and aimed at

reduce port rates and charges So the 3 measures belong to affect port rates and

charges

Eco-friendly transport means conversion Eco-friendly means of transport are

much accounted of green port for example railway discharge less GHG emission

than truck barge with a clean engine among the river and inshore canal

Joint distribution joint distribution is a collaborative system which port

provides among many logistics companies It can make the cargo handling speed

rapidly and reduce cargo storage time for CO2 emission reducing such as

refrigerated container In an addition it also makes the logistics companies

transport more efficient

Cost on amount of CO2 emission differenced from other port the cost on

amount of CO2 is included in the port cost The cost aims to reduce the CO2

emission directly

CO2 emission reduction policies compared with other traditional port Green

Port gives more cost discount and incentives but in an addition there are many

policies on CO2 emission restriction Such as aging trucks restrictions in inland

transport department ship entry speed reduced and fuel changed in the ship

35

department and so on Whether these restriction policies constrain port

development or not and the degree of these policies constrain port development

will be explain by the AHP results

Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors some ports in the

western countries are opened as a travel place for visitors so as to change the

polluted impress and raise the position in our heart

Cost on amount of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction policies and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors can affect the social

circumstance factor Whether these measures can or not improve the social

circumstance and port competitiveness we have to see the next calculation and

results

36

Chapter 4 The Green Port Competitiveness

Analysis

41 The Green Port Competitiveness Model by AHP

The AHP is one multi-criteria decision making method which has been

extensively applied to a variety of decision-making situations The multi-criteria

techniques are considered to be a promising framework for evaluation of

decision-making factors since they have the potential to take into account

conflicting multidimensional incommensurable and uncertain effects of

decisions explicitly

In order to apply the AHP method a hierarchical decision schema was

constructed by decomposing the decision problem into its decision elements

37

After that the importance or preferences of the decision elements are examined in

a pair-wise comparison to the elements in the hierarchy The parameters are

estimated using pair-wise comparisons between the importance of the attribute or

decision element in the function using data made by each responder Making

comparisons is a question of which of the two attributes is more import as well as

how much more important

Follow these theories the Green Port Competitiveness Model choose factors as

follow in port competitiveness factors part there are port facilities port rates and

charges inland connection social circumstance in Green Port construction part

there are e-RTGC AMP AGV green ship certification system green flag

incentives on the new cleaning technology eco-friendly transport means

conversion joint distribution CO2 emission reduction policies cost on amount of

CO2 emission beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

38

Figure 41 Green Port Competitiveness AHP model

Follow the Green Port Competitiveness AHP as shown we set a questionnaire

survey to many experts scholars working in logistics system area And we got 15

ones and 14 ones results are believable and integrated

42 Green Port Competitiveness Analysis

39

The key to construction of the factors which affects the port competitiveness

is to determine the conceptual model The selection of the factors directly affects

the evaluation of the result In order to ensure the accuracy objectivity and

practicality of evaluation results the following basic principles must be followed

when selecting factors systematic principles the principle of universal

comparability practical principle and goal-oriented principle In view of the

foregoing the competitiveness which affected by Green Port construction model

is made The analysis follows established principles of port competitiveness

evaluation taking into account the characteristics and functions of the port as well

as port facilities port services port rates and charges ship entrance inland

connection social circumstances and so on

(1) Port facilities

e-RTGC U11 AMP U12 AGV U13

(2) Port rates and charges

Green ship certification system U21 Incentives on the new clean

technology U22 Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

(3) Inland connection

Eco-friendly means of transport U31 Joint distribution U32

(4) Social circumstances

40

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41 CO2 emission reduction policies

U42 Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors U43

Table 421 Details of Level I and Level II values

Level I

indicators Symbol Level II indicators Symbol

Port facilities A1

e-RTGC U11

AMP U12

AGV U13

Port rates and

charges A2

Green ship certification system U21

Incentives on the new clean technology U22

Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

Inland

connection A3

Eco-friendly means of transport U31

Joint distribution U32

Social

circumstances A4

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41

CO2 emissions reduction policies U42

Beautiful environment construction in inner

harbors U43

41

I Determination of level I indicator weights

As the ports competitiveness evaluation indicators at this level are complex

and the elements are not easily quantified AHP is adopted to determine the

indicator weights with the basic steps as follows

(1) Establish a comparative judgment matrix The comparative judgment

matrix is obtained through comparing contributed proportion of multiple

indicators to the overall target by the judgment scale wherein the fuzzy

judgment number introduced is 1 3 5 7 and 9 and the reciprocal of

such number indicates the important degree of one element relatively to

another The results are shown in next table

Table 422 Comparison matrix of level I indicators

A1 A2 A3 A4

A1 1 15 13 3

A2 5 1 3 7

A3 3 13 1 5

A4 13 17 15 1

(2) Calculate the characteristic vector of the comparative judgment matrix

which refers to the weighted vector of the indicator The writer adopts

42

the geometric method to calculate the characteristic vector The

calculated result is as follows

ω=(012 0560 026 006)T λmax=418 It can be obtained from the table

RI=09 Wherein ω is the characteristic vector corresponding to the

maximum characteristic value λmax of the comparative judgment matrix

namely the weighted vector of the indicator RI is the average

consistency indicator as shown in following table

Table423 Average random consistency indicator RI

Matrix Order

RI

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

0 0 058 09 112 124 132 141

Matrix Order

RI

9 10 11 12 13 14 15

145 149 152 154 156 158 159

(3) Conduct consistency check on the comparative judgment matrix Adopt

the random consistency proportion CR to judge the consistency of the

comparative judgment matrix According to CI= (λmax -n)(n-1) and

CR=CIRI it can be obtained through calculation CR=007lt01 Thus

this comparative judgment matrix has a satisfactory consistency and the

indicator weight coefficient calculated through this matrix is acceptable

43

II Determination of level II indicator weights

The data at this level are the details of level Ⅰ indicator The judgment

matrix obtained through comparing multiple sub-indicators under Level Ⅰ

indicators is adopted to determine the weights of sub-indicators under each

indicator one by one The specific steps are as follows

(1) The experts score the weights within the given range To determine the

weights of several small indicators under the same big indicator it is

supposed that the score of small indicator ｋ under the indicator j made

by the expert i is Xijk wherein i=12n n is the total number of

experts ј=12m m is the total number of LevelⅡ indicator к

=12Oj Oj is the number of small indicators under the big indicator ј

іјк IJK LRC l I j k

(2) The credit rating of the expert і is l l =1 2 3 l =1 indicates this expert

is quite familiar with the evaluated contents l =2 indicator this expert is

44

with the evaluated contents l =3 indicates this expert is not quite familiar

with the evaluated contents yi1 is the=08 yi2 =05 and yi3=1

(3) The comprehensive evaluation score of small indicator l under the

indicator j is as follows

(4) The formula for normalization processing of indicator weights is as

follows and the absolute weight of the indicator set is marked as

q=(q1q2q11)

(5) Because of the same justification and principle we donrsquot give the detail

about the calculation The same with the level Ⅰ calculation we

manipulation data one by one and get 14 results And obtain the average

45

results by weighted average method The results detail as Table for the

final weights of Level-Ⅱ evaluation indicators

Above the calculation process and method are just one of data from the

questionable surveys In this study the final results are got from the

weighted average by the results of each questionable survey

The final results are shown as Table424

Table424 Indicator weights table of indicator system

Level I

indicators Weight LevelⅡ indicators

Relative

weight

Absolute

weight

Importance

percentage

Port Facilities

A1 02735

e-RTGC U11 05506 01506 1506

AMP U12 01648 00451 451

AGV U13 02826 00773 773

Port Rates and

Charges A2

02902

Green ship certification s

ystem U21 04724 01371 1371

Incentives on the new

clean technology U22 02871 00833 833

Green Flag (speed

reduction incentive)U23 02405 00698 698

Inland

connection A3

02865

Eco-friendly means of

transport U31 05942 01702 1702

Joint distribution U32 04058 01163 1163

Social

environmentA4 00863

Cost on amount of CO2

emission U41 03698 00319 319

CO2 emissions reduction

policies U42 02273 00196 196

Beautiful environment

construction in inner

harbors U43

04029 00348 348

46

III Case study

In the questionable survey we also got the mark of Green Port measures

evaluation value of many main ports such as Singapore Port Shanghai Port

Hongkong Port Busan Port LALB Port Rotterdam Port and Yocohama Port

The highest mark is 5 and lowest one is 1

Table425 Evaluation value of many main ports

Singapore

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

LALB

Port

Rotterdam

Port

Yocohama

Port

Port facilities 38000 36000 34000 38182 38000 42000 32000

Port rates and

charges 32000 36000 31000 35455 32000 39000 33000

Inland

connection 39000 34545 35000 29091 35000 45000 36000

Social

circumstance 42000 32727 41000 32000 38000 42727 36000

With the Green Port and Port competitiveness indicator weights results these

ports got the final evaluation value

47

Table426 Final evaluation value on main ports Green Port measures and

competitiveness

Rotterdam

Port

Singapore

Port

LALB

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

Yocohama

Port

394 345 330 330 319 318 317

43 Results Analysis

From the results table we can obtain the many results as following

① The main Green Port measures which are more important to improve port

competitiveness are Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system the indicator weights are 01702 01506 and

01371 among the 11 indicators

② In the Green Port construction Cost on amount of CO2 emission and CO2

emissions reduction policies are the restrictions indicators but the weight

of two indicators are not big 00319 and 00196 So effect on Green Port

construction to port competitiveness does have the weaken capacity but

not clearly strengthen more clearly Thus Green Port construction really

could improve the port competitiveness

48

③ In the case study traditional ports Rotterdam and Singapore Port give us

better examples on Green Port construction especially Rotterdam Port

④ Hongkong Busan and Yocohama Port all got a lower evaluation value

But in detail Hongkong and Yocohama Port got a lower on the port

facilities and rates and charges Busan Port got a higher on the port

facilities and rates and charges but a lower on the inland connection and

social circumstance

⑤ Shanghai Port doesnrsquot have Particular strength factors but the

comprehensive strength is not bad the same as LALB Port

49

Chapter 5 Conclusion

In this thesis the effects of Green Port construction for improving the port

competitiveness have been studied Under the definition of Green Port the

characteristics of Green Port and its effects has been shown by analysing the AHP

method which based on the questionary survey for Green Port specialists and port

officers

Follow the results of analysis on Green Port competitiveness AHP model

Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green ship certification system is

better for Green Port Construction welcome for shipping companies and citizens

who live around the port And in the analysis of Port competitiveness factors port

rates and charges always affects port competitiveness a lot As a trend inland

connection factor abstracts more attention of shipping companies

50

On the trend of port department each port should take a activity to adjust

strategy for improving its competitiveness Such as in the main ports evaluation

Busan port get a high value on port rates and charges and port facilities but as a

lower value on inland connection factor the final value is not as well as we look

forward In the evaluation of Singapore Port through it gets a lower value on rates

and charges higher value on inland connection and social circumstance causes the

final value are better So the Green Port Construction may be a trend in port

department

In the results of this thesis Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system are better solutions for Green Port Construction And

especially it can be verified that the port rates and charges always affects port

competitiveness Futhermore the investment for Green Port construction and its

effects have to be verified in the future

51

References

1 Hoyle B S and Smith J 1992 Transport and Development In Modern

transport geography edited by B S Hoyle R D Knowles (London Belhaven

Press)pp11-31

2 Beresford A K C De Souza A J R G and Pettit S J 2005 Stategic

development of liner shipping companies and terminal operators Ocean yearbook

19(Chicago 1L The University of Chicago Press) pp 732-750

3 Heaver T D 2002 Supply chain and logistics management implications for

liner shipping In The handbook of maritime economics and business edited by C

Grammenos (LondonLLP) pp 375-396

4 Park T E (2011) A Study on selection criteria of Green Port and evaluation of

major Korean port A masters thesis of graduate school of Incheon university

52

5 JeongBH (2009)Green port management policy directions in the green

growth era- The case of Gwangyang port in Republic of Korea Journal of Korea

Port Economic Association Vol25(3) p361-384

6 Lee J S Han N H(2009) A study on Green Port Revitalization According to

Air Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

7 Lee Y K Nan J W(2010)Green Logistics Policy Analysis and Implications

of Japan

8 Lee B S (2010)Tendency and Countermeasures on Green Logistics in Port

Logistics Company A masters thesis of graduate school of Korean Maritime

university

9 Lee J S (2009) A Study on Green Port Revitalization According to Air

Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

10 Zhang F Y Li Z Lu X J Yao X L(2008)Competitiveness of Inland

Ports Based on F-AHP

11 Port of Long Beach (2009) Green Port Policy wwwpolbcom

12 The port of Los Angeles wwwportoflosangelesorg

15

In Seattle Port Air Environment Maritime Improvement plan has been

accepted in 2005 The plan includes first set up Puget Sound Maritime Air

Forum and make one AMP provide services for two tour ships second change

the diesel hybrid equipment into electric utilization Third use bio-diesel and

diesel catalyst and reduce the emission Forth emphasize the standard and plan of

truck minimum the idling time

Seattle Port Tacoma Port and Vancouver made a assignment and promote

ldquoNorthwest Ports Clean Air Strategyrdquo

④ Auckland Port

Auckland Port set up the aging replacement plan in 2008 and invent 20 milion

dollars gas emission should reach the level And cargo transport system in port

hinterland port authority and Air environment management committee make

cooperation and give an incentive to truck which use new clean technology

Table232 Short term and Long term Green Port Plans in Auckland Port

16

17

232 EU

Rotterdam Port

As the biggest Port in EU Rotterdam Port takes more affords in reducing the

CO2 emission Main programs are low carbon footprint AMP and so on The

limitation of CO2 emission reduces down 50 of 1990 by 2025

In July 2008 the authority of Rotterdam port gave international cooperation

with other ports an extra boost by organizing the World Ports Climate Conference

During this conference the authority of Rotterdam discussed possible ways in

which ports and business could reduce air pollution and CO2 emissions The

proposals the authority of Rotterdam was set out in a declaration which was

supported by all 55 port cities attending the conference The conference resulted

in five projects to improve air quality and reduce CO2 emissions The authority of

Rotterdam is behind the project to further elaborate an Environmental Ship Index

The Rotterdam Climate Initiative is a joint venture with the municipality of

Rotterdam DCMR Environmental Protection Agency Rijnmond and Deltalinqs

Common goal is to halve CO2 emissions in the region by 2025 in comparison with

1990 levels In connection with the Rotterdam Climate Initiative the port works

on (together with DCMR and others) creating an infrastructure for the capture

18

transport and storage of CO2 A business case presented in the summer of 2008 is

now being elaborated into a business plan The business case concludes that

Rotterdam can begin in 2015 with the capture transport and underground storage

of five million tons of CO2 per annum This means that the basic infrastructure

will then be in place for further growth in capture and storage to twenty million

tons in 2025

In 2008 a start was made on the development of a sustainability index for

activities relating to the P for Planet (environment) In 2009 it will further expand

the index to cover the P for People and the P for Profit In the first phase of the

sustainability index CO2 footprint sustainable purchasing sustainable building

and sustainable land allocation will be covered

233 Japan

① Tacoma Port

In the Tacoma Port there are some programs on protecting the air water and

soil environment

In the air protection department ldquoNorthwest Ports Clean Air Strategyrdquo

ldquoGreen Gateway for Traderdquo and ldquoTruck Programrdquo had brought out to against air

pollution The concepts include using ultra-low sulfur diesel bio-diesel and other

cleaner-burning fuels in cargo-handling equipment using low-sulfur distillate

19

fuels at berth adding ldquogreen designrdquo environmental features to ships including

diesel-electric motors that save up to 30 percent in fuel and significantly reduce

emissions setting targets to change older less-efficient truck engines installing

anti-idling devices on rail-switching engines as well as partnering on other

innovative technological advance

The Port of Tacomarsquos four dockside rail yards move cargo quickly and

efficiently from container terminals They also reduce the number of trucks on

city streets and highways Each full train that leaves the Port represents 250 to 300

trucks not on our roads reducing roadway congestion and diesel emissions The

lowest emission route to ship cargo from Asia to the US Midwest is through the

Puget Sound according to the results of a study by Herbert Engineering released

in May 2009

And in the land protection program there are successful clean projects open

spaces and future habitat restoration In 2007 the Port purchased about 70 acres

of open space known as Juliarsquos Gulch and Storey Pit located between the

Tideflats and residential Northeast Tacoma Monitor water quality system is in

utilization in the water department in Tacoma Port

② Tokyo Port

In the Tokyo Port Green Port programs are almost similar with Tacoma Port

e-RTGC (Rubber Tired Gantry Crane) the barge between Tokyo and Yocohama

20

which shorten international maritime container cargo transportation land distance

super eco-shipbuilding technology dissemination and promotion green business

certification operation and shippers and logistics companies support cooperation

③ Osaka Port and Hakata Port

AMP electrical power equipment and solar power equipment are in utilization in

Osaka Port E-RTGC and solar power of refrigerated container are in utilization in

the Hakata Port

234 Korea

In Busan Port a set of Green Port took implementation such as LNG truck

E-RTGC equipment utilization eco-friendly transport means conversion (rail

canal barge) and GHG emission reduction obligation Table233

21

ltTable 233gt Summary of the Main Port of Green Port Measures

COUNTRY PORT MEASURES

US

LALB Port

Green flag AMP discharge gas reduction obligation

recommends use of alternative fuels and clean fuel

funding for the development of alternative fuels facilities

by new engine development instead of NOx emissions

green truck program (reduce70-80) low-sulfur fuel

utilization restore and revitalize the Los Cerritos

Wetlands

New York

Port

AMP modernized facilities utilization high speed hybrid

yard

Auckland

Port

Incentives on the new cleaning technology containers

transportation system

Seattle Port

AMP green ship membership Tier 4 level reducing PM

by 1994 level Smart Way program Northwest Ports

Clean Air Strategy

EU Rotterdam

Port

Clean engine (barge) green ship membership carbon

footprint calculation cruise ship which under port

authority change to use low-sulfur fuel low emission

engine development and utilization Green Award AMP

ship recycling incentives

Japan

Tokyo Port

RTGC (Rubber Tired Gantry Crane) apply for the barge

between Tokyo and Yocohama shorten international

maritime container cargo transportation land distance

super eco-shipbuilding technology dissemination and

promotion green business certification operation

shippers and logistics companies support cooperation

Osaka Port AMP electrical power equipment solar power equipment

Hakata Port E-RTGC solar power utilization in refrigerated container

Korea Busan Port

LNG truck E-RTGC eco-friendly transport means

conversion (rail canal barge) GHG emission reduction

obligation

22

24 Green Port Indicators Research

As the previous section list shown Green Port measures and programs are

substantially the same

When a ship entry in the port boundary from voyage many ports give a

incentive on shifting and utilizing sulfur-low fuel and reducing the speed under

20 miles when the ship berth in the port the alternative maritime power are

provided which replace its power generation

Next in the cargo unloading and loading department the same with above

utilization of sulfur-low fuel and electrical equipment are promoted and

eco-driving education to driver is necessary what speed is fuel fully burning and

emission minimum point

In the cargo transport department in other words truck department the

replacement on aging trucks is popular in many ports aging trucks are prohibited

close to port at the same time an incentive or support function are provided on

aging replacement The automated equipments are recommended to utilize in the

Green Port like hybrid yard tractor And a perfect plan on truck running also could

reduce the idling time and against the emission of CO2

The details reference the following Table 241

23

Table241 Green Port measures in port each department

Emission reduction programs

Ship

department

Shipping

in the

port

boundary

Obligation on the utilization of sulfur-low fuel

Reform ship engine and utilize hybrid

Speed reduce in the port entrance(a off-shore fee

incentive)

Off-shore AMP

Shift utilization system of clean fuel

Unloading and loading

department

Obligation on the utilization of sulfur-low fuel

Replace electrical equipment

Eco-driving

Truck department Hybrid yard tractor utilization

Promote aging truck replacement

Minimum the idling time

Others LED light in the Port

Develop renew and recycle resource energy

The Green Port measures in this study are e-RTGC AMP AGV Green Ship

certification system incentives on the new clean technology Green Flag(speed

reduction incentive)eco-friendly transport means conversion joint distribution

the cost on account of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction polities and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

The details and definition on each Green Port measure and the relationship with

Port Competitiveness will be expressed in next chapter

24

Chapter 3 The Relationship between Port

Competitiveness and Green Port Construction

31 Port Competitiveness Literature Review

Although past studies on port selection models have focused on port selection

made by port facilities port services port rates and charge and location

Murphy made a survey between 534 shipping companies and port authorities in

1989 and between 1850 shipping companies and port authorities in 1992

Comparing with other papers Murphys got a survey among more widely

objects In his paper port selection(port competitiveness) was seen to affected by

facilities situation appropriate pilotage max ship entrance probability the

25

capability of handling non-regular cargos whether to provide information of ship

nationality or not and port services level

In French model (1979) there are two factors affecting the port selection (port

competitiveness) endogenous factor and exogenous factor In endogenous factors

there are adequacy and physical plant condition of terminal facilities terminal rate

and charges frequency and geographic coverage of ship and freight services the

capacity of connecting to inland rails or transport net and the services provides for

the shipping or logistics And exogenous factors included the size and economic

capacity of hinterland as a source exports or market for imports national

economic situation trade policy and support established by government the

situation at home and abroad

The same as Frenchs paper in Paters paper in 1990 there are endogenous and

exogenous factors too In endogenous there are the services provides for the

shipping or logistics capacity of terminal facilities situation and condition of

facilities operation strategies established by port authority convenience to utilize

And the political situation at home and abroad social change economic factor

stabilized labor and capital However in 2004 there is a tremendous change in

Peters new paper There are four parts multi-modal process interface transport

modes infrastructure Multi-model Process part includes ship entrance rapid

speed and accuracy shipper and shipping companies reactive operation flexibility

Interface includes labor power information technology and so on And there are

26

ship calls frequency and amount of fleet factors in the transport modes part In the

infrastructure part includes port facility equipments and so on

Port facilities rates and charges services inland situation and social

circumstance factors affect the port selection and competitiveness a lot from the

research until 1992 by Murphy And in Lirn and Pater research 2003-2004 the

new and detail factors are shown to us

We can clearly see the contents in next table

27

Table 311 Prevention literature research results

Influence factors

French

(1979)

Endogenous

port facilities port rate and charges calls frequency port services

port connection with inland

Exogenous

economic size of hinterland national economic situation trade

policy home and abroad situation

Willingale

(1982)

voyage distance economy size entrance to port and route port

facilities max ship entrance probability port operation rates and

charges port authority scale of port

Slack

(1985)

cost of inland transportation port proximity ship demurrage

multi-transport

Peter

(1990)

Endogenous

port facilities condition of facilities operation strategies

convenience to utilize

Exogenous

political situation social change economic factor stabilized labor

and capital

UNCTAD

(1992)

port facilities services location level of financial industry

information communication system social circumstances economic

stability

Murphy

(1992)

facilities situation appropriate pilotage max ship entrance

probability the capability of handling non-regular cargos whether to

provide information of ship nationality or not port services level

Lirn

(2003-2004)

physical and technologic facilities geopolitical location port

operation and management shipping and terminal cost

Peter

(2004)

Multi-modal Process

ship entrance rapid speed and accuracy shipper and shipping

companies reactive operation flexibility

Interface labor and capital

Transport modes ship calls frequency and amount of fleet factors

28

And there are many experts and scholars research for the influence factors to

port selection and competitiveness in Korea The specific content follows table5

Table 312 Literature research in Korean academia

Influence factors

Jeon Il-su (1992) location facilities charges service level (EDI) terminal operation

port authority

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

( 1993 )

location facilities throughput charges service operation

situation

Kim Hak-so

(1993)

export shipping amount of annual cost of each ton of cargo

marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km of

cargo loading time

import marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km

of cargo amount of liner ship

Yeo Gi-tae (1996) location facilities throughput charge service operation situation

Ha Dong-u amp

Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

location facilities service level logistics charges environment of

logistics service

Yeo Gi-tae (1999) location facilities throughput charges service

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

throughput quay length yard area GNP

Kum Jong-su

(2001)

distance between port and cargo site terminal facilities service

the capacity of multi-transport capacity of cargo handling

administrative service rates and charges of inland transport

congestion

Yeo Gi-tae (2002) location throughput facilities service level

Kim Jin-gu (2002) port facilities location cargo amount rates and charges services

29

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005)

voyage degree to attract cargo cargo handling cost amount of

handling cargo connection to inland service reliability location

berth availability quay length feeder network depth

transshipment volumes cargo security profitability

offing degree to attract cargo berth availability cargo handling

cost transshipment volumes

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005)

cargo handling amount port facilities location rates and charges

level of service

Heo Yun-su

(2005)

port facilities rates and charges services marketing geopolitics

location economic and social circumstance

Kim Geun-seop

(2007)

port services facilities cargo handling amount location cost

productivity factor global factor

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) rates and charges services port characteristics

Many experts and scholars make a research on port selection and

competitiveness recently But the factors selection criteria are difference

Nevertheless the main factors are facilities services cost and so on

Therefore port competitiveness factors which chose in this study are port

facilities port services port rates and charges and social circumstance

However the main factors are not the whole factors any more more and more

detail factors and characteristic factors appearance Port selection and

competitiveness factors have changed And the development content is introduced

in next part

30

32 Port Competitiveness Development Tree

As mentioned above port facilities port rates and charges and port location are

the basic factors in the port selection and competitiveness

From the following table we can discover that first one facilities rates and

charges and location are the most important factor in port selection and

competitiveness second one the importance of social circumstance turns larger

inland connection is necessary all the time

Table 321 Main factor in the Pretentious Research

31

port facilities rates and

charges

inland

connection

social

circumstance location

French (1979) radic radic radic

Wiliingale (1982) radic radic

Slack (1985) radic

Pater (1990) radic radic

UNCTAD (1992) radic radic radic

Murphy(1992) radic

Jeon Il-su (1992) radic radic radic

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

(1993)

radic radic radic

Kim Hak-so

(1993) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1996) radic radic radic

Ha Dong-u

amp Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1998) radic radic radic

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

radic

Kum Jong-su

(2001) radic radic radic radic

Kim Jin-gu(2002) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(2002) radic radic

Lirn(2003-2004) radic radic radic

Pater(2004) radic

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005) radic radic radic

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005) radic radic radic

Heo Yun-su

(2005) radic radic radic radic

Kim Geun-seop

(2007) radic radic radic radic

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) radic

32

33 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green

Port Construction

Following the research above Port facilities rates and charges inland

connection and social circumstance are chose in this study port selection and

competitiveness department

e-RTGC Electric rubber tired gantry crane is a mobile gantry crane used for

stacking intermodal containers within the stacking areas of a container terminal

e-RTGC are used at container terminals and container storage yards to straddling

multiple lanes of railroad and container storage or when maximum storage

density in the container stack is desired

AMP is shorted for Alternative Marine Power and Itrsquos a facility which

provides the electric system in the land for ship which entry in the port The

facility can reduce emissions which ship get entrance in the port

AGV is a mobile robot that follows markers or wires in the floor or uses

vision or lasers They are most often used in industrial applications to move

materials around a manufacturing facility or a warehouse Automatic Guided

Vehicle systems work around-the-clock making continuous flow and just-in-time

delivery easier to achieve Application of the automatic guided vehicle has broade

33

ned during the late 20th century and they are no longer restricted to industrial

environments

The e-RTGC AMP and AGV are the new clean facilities and equipments in the

Green Port they donrsquot reduce the efficiency of handling cargo and they also

reduce the CO2 emission account

Green ship certification system if a ship utilizes clean and CO2 emission

reduction technology on the ship building adds equipment and management and

son on certification would be received And the port authority gives some

incentive and preferential treatment among 45 ports Such as a better schedule is

provided for green membership ship priority in handing cargo and discount on

entrance fee

Incentives on the new cleaning technology There are two expressions about

this measure one is that the port authority give a incentive to ship which have a

great utilization on the new cleaning technology and the other one is that

environment provide many incentives to the authority which utilize the new

cleaning technology in the port such as LED street lamp solar power cranes

Green flag The Green Flag incentive program was set up to encourage ships to

slow down in order to improve air quality The Green Flag program provides

approximately $2 million a year in discounts for vessel operators who slow their

ships to 12 knots (22kmh) or less within 20miles (32km) of the harbor

34

According to the Port the Green Flag program reduced air pollution by 600tons in

2007 and is expected to do better in 2008

All of Green ship certification system incentives on the new cleaning

technology and Green Flag are incentives provided for users of port and aimed at

reduce port rates and charges So the 3 measures belong to affect port rates and

charges

Eco-friendly transport means conversion Eco-friendly means of transport are

much accounted of green port for example railway discharge less GHG emission

than truck barge with a clean engine among the river and inshore canal

Joint distribution joint distribution is a collaborative system which port

provides among many logistics companies It can make the cargo handling speed

rapidly and reduce cargo storage time for CO2 emission reducing such as

refrigerated container In an addition it also makes the logistics companies

transport more efficient

Cost on amount of CO2 emission differenced from other port the cost on

amount of CO2 is included in the port cost The cost aims to reduce the CO2

emission directly

CO2 emission reduction policies compared with other traditional port Green

Port gives more cost discount and incentives but in an addition there are many

policies on CO2 emission restriction Such as aging trucks restrictions in inland

transport department ship entry speed reduced and fuel changed in the ship

35

department and so on Whether these restriction policies constrain port

development or not and the degree of these policies constrain port development

will be explain by the AHP results

Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors some ports in the

western countries are opened as a travel place for visitors so as to change the

polluted impress and raise the position in our heart

Cost on amount of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction policies and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors can affect the social

circumstance factor Whether these measures can or not improve the social

circumstance and port competitiveness we have to see the next calculation and

results

36

Chapter 4 The Green Port Competitiveness

Analysis

41 The Green Port Competitiveness Model by AHP

The AHP is one multi-criteria decision making method which has been

extensively applied to a variety of decision-making situations The multi-criteria

techniques are considered to be a promising framework for evaluation of

decision-making factors since they have the potential to take into account

conflicting multidimensional incommensurable and uncertain effects of

decisions explicitly

In order to apply the AHP method a hierarchical decision schema was

constructed by decomposing the decision problem into its decision elements

37

After that the importance or preferences of the decision elements are examined in

a pair-wise comparison to the elements in the hierarchy The parameters are

estimated using pair-wise comparisons between the importance of the attribute or

decision element in the function using data made by each responder Making

comparisons is a question of which of the two attributes is more import as well as

how much more important

Follow these theories the Green Port Competitiveness Model choose factors as

follow in port competitiveness factors part there are port facilities port rates and

charges inland connection social circumstance in Green Port construction part

there are e-RTGC AMP AGV green ship certification system green flag

incentives on the new cleaning technology eco-friendly transport means

conversion joint distribution CO2 emission reduction policies cost on amount of

CO2 emission beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

38

Figure 41 Green Port Competitiveness AHP model

Follow the Green Port Competitiveness AHP as shown we set a questionnaire

survey to many experts scholars working in logistics system area And we got 15

ones and 14 ones results are believable and integrated

42 Green Port Competitiveness Analysis

39

The key to construction of the factors which affects the port competitiveness

is to determine the conceptual model The selection of the factors directly affects

the evaluation of the result In order to ensure the accuracy objectivity and

practicality of evaluation results the following basic principles must be followed

when selecting factors systematic principles the principle of universal

comparability practical principle and goal-oriented principle In view of the

foregoing the competitiveness which affected by Green Port construction model

is made The analysis follows established principles of port competitiveness

evaluation taking into account the characteristics and functions of the port as well

as port facilities port services port rates and charges ship entrance inland

connection social circumstances and so on

(1) Port facilities

e-RTGC U11 AMP U12 AGV U13

(2) Port rates and charges

Green ship certification system U21 Incentives on the new clean

technology U22 Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

(3) Inland connection

Eco-friendly means of transport U31 Joint distribution U32

(4) Social circumstances

40

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41 CO2 emission reduction policies

U42 Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors U43

Table 421 Details of Level I and Level II values

Level I

indicators Symbol Level II indicators Symbol

Port facilities A1

e-RTGC U11

AMP U12

AGV U13

Port rates and

charges A2

Green ship certification system U21

Incentives on the new clean technology U22

Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

Inland

connection A3

Eco-friendly means of transport U31

Joint distribution U32

Social

circumstances A4

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41

CO2 emissions reduction policies U42

Beautiful environment construction in inner

harbors U43

41

I Determination of level I indicator weights

As the ports competitiveness evaluation indicators at this level are complex

and the elements are not easily quantified AHP is adopted to determine the

indicator weights with the basic steps as follows

(1) Establish a comparative judgment matrix The comparative judgment

matrix is obtained through comparing contributed proportion of multiple

indicators to the overall target by the judgment scale wherein the fuzzy

judgment number introduced is 1 3 5 7 and 9 and the reciprocal of

such number indicates the important degree of one element relatively to

another The results are shown in next table

Table 422 Comparison matrix of level I indicators

A1 A2 A3 A4

A1 1 15 13 3

A2 5 1 3 7

A3 3 13 1 5

A4 13 17 15 1

(2) Calculate the characteristic vector of the comparative judgment matrix

which refers to the weighted vector of the indicator The writer adopts

42

the geometric method to calculate the characteristic vector The

calculated result is as follows

ω=(012 0560 026 006)T λmax=418 It can be obtained from the table

RI=09 Wherein ω is the characteristic vector corresponding to the

maximum characteristic value λmax of the comparative judgment matrix

namely the weighted vector of the indicator RI is the average

consistency indicator as shown in following table

Table423 Average random consistency indicator RI

Matrix Order

RI

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

0 0 058 09 112 124 132 141

Matrix Order

RI

9 10 11 12 13 14 15

145 149 152 154 156 158 159

(3) Conduct consistency check on the comparative judgment matrix Adopt

the random consistency proportion CR to judge the consistency of the

comparative judgment matrix According to CI= (λmax -n)(n-1) and

CR=CIRI it can be obtained through calculation CR=007lt01 Thus

this comparative judgment matrix has a satisfactory consistency and the

indicator weight coefficient calculated through this matrix is acceptable

43

II Determination of level II indicator weights

The data at this level are the details of level Ⅰ indicator The judgment

matrix obtained through comparing multiple sub-indicators under Level Ⅰ

indicators is adopted to determine the weights of sub-indicators under each

indicator one by one The specific steps are as follows

(1) The experts score the weights within the given range To determine the

weights of several small indicators under the same big indicator it is

supposed that the score of small indicator ｋ under the indicator j made

by the expert i is Xijk wherein i=12n n is the total number of

experts ј=12m m is the total number of LevelⅡ indicator к

=12Oj Oj is the number of small indicators under the big indicator ј

іјк IJK LRC l I j k

(2) The credit rating of the expert і is l l =1 2 3 l =1 indicates this expert

is quite familiar with the evaluated contents l =2 indicator this expert is

44

with the evaluated contents l =3 indicates this expert is not quite familiar

with the evaluated contents yi1 is the=08 yi2 =05 and yi3=1

(3) The comprehensive evaluation score of small indicator l under the

indicator j is as follows

(4) The formula for normalization processing of indicator weights is as

follows and the absolute weight of the indicator set is marked as

q=(q1q2q11)

(5) Because of the same justification and principle we donrsquot give the detail

about the calculation The same with the level Ⅰ calculation we

manipulation data one by one and get 14 results And obtain the average

45

results by weighted average method The results detail as Table for the

final weights of Level-Ⅱ evaluation indicators

Above the calculation process and method are just one of data from the

questionable surveys In this study the final results are got from the

weighted average by the results of each questionable survey

The final results are shown as Table424

Table424 Indicator weights table of indicator system

Level I

indicators Weight LevelⅡ indicators

Relative

weight

Absolute

weight

Importance

percentage

Port Facilities

A1 02735

e-RTGC U11 05506 01506 1506

AMP U12 01648 00451 451

AGV U13 02826 00773 773

Port Rates and

Charges A2

02902

Green ship certification s

ystem U21 04724 01371 1371

Incentives on the new

clean technology U22 02871 00833 833

Green Flag (speed

reduction incentive)U23 02405 00698 698

Inland

connection A3

02865

Eco-friendly means of

transport U31 05942 01702 1702

Joint distribution U32 04058 01163 1163

Social

environmentA4 00863

Cost on amount of CO2

emission U41 03698 00319 319

CO2 emissions reduction

policies U42 02273 00196 196

Beautiful environment

construction in inner

harbors U43

04029 00348 348

46

III Case study

In the questionable survey we also got the mark of Green Port measures

evaluation value of many main ports such as Singapore Port Shanghai Port

Hongkong Port Busan Port LALB Port Rotterdam Port and Yocohama Port

The highest mark is 5 and lowest one is 1

Table425 Evaluation value of many main ports

Singapore

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

LALB

Port

Rotterdam

Port

Yocohama

Port

Port facilities 38000 36000 34000 38182 38000 42000 32000

Port rates and

charges 32000 36000 31000 35455 32000 39000 33000

Inland

connection 39000 34545 35000 29091 35000 45000 36000

Social

circumstance 42000 32727 41000 32000 38000 42727 36000

With the Green Port and Port competitiveness indicator weights results these

ports got the final evaluation value

47

Table426 Final evaluation value on main ports Green Port measures and

competitiveness

Rotterdam

Port

Singapore

Port

LALB

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

Yocohama

Port

394 345 330 330 319 318 317

43 Results Analysis

From the results table we can obtain the many results as following

① The main Green Port measures which are more important to improve port

competitiveness are Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system the indicator weights are 01702 01506 and

01371 among the 11 indicators

② In the Green Port construction Cost on amount of CO2 emission and CO2

emissions reduction policies are the restrictions indicators but the weight

of two indicators are not big 00319 and 00196 So effect on Green Port

construction to port competitiveness does have the weaken capacity but

not clearly strengthen more clearly Thus Green Port construction really

could improve the port competitiveness

48

③ In the case study traditional ports Rotterdam and Singapore Port give us

better examples on Green Port construction especially Rotterdam Port

④ Hongkong Busan and Yocohama Port all got a lower evaluation value

But in detail Hongkong and Yocohama Port got a lower on the port

facilities and rates and charges Busan Port got a higher on the port

facilities and rates and charges but a lower on the inland connection and

social circumstance

⑤ Shanghai Port doesnrsquot have Particular strength factors but the

comprehensive strength is not bad the same as LALB Port

49

Chapter 5 Conclusion

In this thesis the effects of Green Port construction for improving the port

competitiveness have been studied Under the definition of Green Port the

characteristics of Green Port and its effects has been shown by analysing the AHP

method which based on the questionary survey for Green Port specialists and port

officers

Follow the results of analysis on Green Port competitiveness AHP model

Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green ship certification system is

better for Green Port Construction welcome for shipping companies and citizens

who live around the port And in the analysis of Port competitiveness factors port

rates and charges always affects port competitiveness a lot As a trend inland

connection factor abstracts more attention of shipping companies

50

On the trend of port department each port should take a activity to adjust

strategy for improving its competitiveness Such as in the main ports evaluation

Busan port get a high value on port rates and charges and port facilities but as a

lower value on inland connection factor the final value is not as well as we look

forward In the evaluation of Singapore Port through it gets a lower value on rates

and charges higher value on inland connection and social circumstance causes the

final value are better So the Green Port Construction may be a trend in port

department

In the results of this thesis Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system are better solutions for Green Port Construction And

especially it can be verified that the port rates and charges always affects port

competitiveness Futhermore the investment for Green Port construction and its

effects have to be verified in the future

51

References

1 Hoyle B S and Smith J 1992 Transport and Development In Modern

transport geography edited by B S Hoyle R D Knowles (London Belhaven

Press)pp11-31

2 Beresford A K C De Souza A J R G and Pettit S J 2005 Stategic

development of liner shipping companies and terminal operators Ocean yearbook

19(Chicago 1L The University of Chicago Press) pp 732-750

3 Heaver T D 2002 Supply chain and logistics management implications for

liner shipping In The handbook of maritime economics and business edited by C

Grammenos (LondonLLP) pp 375-396

4 Park T E (2011) A Study on selection criteria of Green Port and evaluation of

major Korean port A masters thesis of graduate school of Incheon university

52

5 JeongBH (2009)Green port management policy directions in the green

growth era- The case of Gwangyang port in Republic of Korea Journal of Korea

Port Economic Association Vol25(3) p361-384

6 Lee J S Han N H(2009) A study on Green Port Revitalization According to

Air Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

7 Lee Y K Nan J W(2010)Green Logistics Policy Analysis and Implications

of Japan

8 Lee B S (2010)Tendency and Countermeasures on Green Logistics in Port

Logistics Company A masters thesis of graduate school of Korean Maritime

university

9 Lee J S (2009) A Study on Green Port Revitalization According to Air

Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

10 Zhang F Y Li Z Lu X J Yao X L(2008)Competitiveness of Inland

Ports Based on F-AHP

11 Port of Long Beach (2009) Green Port Policy wwwpolbcom

12 The port of Los Angeles wwwportoflosangelesorg

16

17

232 EU

Rotterdam Port

As the biggest Port in EU Rotterdam Port takes more affords in reducing the

CO2 emission Main programs are low carbon footprint AMP and so on The

limitation of CO2 emission reduces down 50 of 1990 by 2025

In July 2008 the authority of Rotterdam port gave international cooperation

with other ports an extra boost by organizing the World Ports Climate Conference

During this conference the authority of Rotterdam discussed possible ways in

which ports and business could reduce air pollution and CO2 emissions The

proposals the authority of Rotterdam was set out in a declaration which was

supported by all 55 port cities attending the conference The conference resulted

in five projects to improve air quality and reduce CO2 emissions The authority of

Rotterdam is behind the project to further elaborate an Environmental Ship Index

The Rotterdam Climate Initiative is a joint venture with the municipality of

Rotterdam DCMR Environmental Protection Agency Rijnmond and Deltalinqs

Common goal is to halve CO2 emissions in the region by 2025 in comparison with

1990 levels In connection with the Rotterdam Climate Initiative the port works

on (together with DCMR and others) creating an infrastructure for the capture

18

transport and storage of CO2 A business case presented in the summer of 2008 is

now being elaborated into a business plan The business case concludes that

Rotterdam can begin in 2015 with the capture transport and underground storage

of five million tons of CO2 per annum This means that the basic infrastructure

will then be in place for further growth in capture and storage to twenty million

tons in 2025

In 2008 a start was made on the development of a sustainability index for

activities relating to the P for Planet (environment) In 2009 it will further expand

the index to cover the P for People and the P for Profit In the first phase of the

sustainability index CO2 footprint sustainable purchasing sustainable building

and sustainable land allocation will be covered

233 Japan

① Tacoma Port

In the Tacoma Port there are some programs on protecting the air water and

soil environment

In the air protection department ldquoNorthwest Ports Clean Air Strategyrdquo

ldquoGreen Gateway for Traderdquo and ldquoTruck Programrdquo had brought out to against air

pollution The concepts include using ultra-low sulfur diesel bio-diesel and other

cleaner-burning fuels in cargo-handling equipment using low-sulfur distillate

19

fuels at berth adding ldquogreen designrdquo environmental features to ships including

diesel-electric motors that save up to 30 percent in fuel and significantly reduce

emissions setting targets to change older less-efficient truck engines installing

anti-idling devices on rail-switching engines as well as partnering on other

innovative technological advance

The Port of Tacomarsquos four dockside rail yards move cargo quickly and

efficiently from container terminals They also reduce the number of trucks on

city streets and highways Each full train that leaves the Port represents 250 to 300

trucks not on our roads reducing roadway congestion and diesel emissions The

lowest emission route to ship cargo from Asia to the US Midwest is through the

Puget Sound according to the results of a study by Herbert Engineering released

in May 2009

And in the land protection program there are successful clean projects open

spaces and future habitat restoration In 2007 the Port purchased about 70 acres

of open space known as Juliarsquos Gulch and Storey Pit located between the

Tideflats and residential Northeast Tacoma Monitor water quality system is in

utilization in the water department in Tacoma Port

② Tokyo Port

In the Tokyo Port Green Port programs are almost similar with Tacoma Port

e-RTGC (Rubber Tired Gantry Crane) the barge between Tokyo and Yocohama

20

which shorten international maritime container cargo transportation land distance

super eco-shipbuilding technology dissemination and promotion green business

certification operation and shippers and logistics companies support cooperation

③ Osaka Port and Hakata Port

AMP electrical power equipment and solar power equipment are in utilization in

Osaka Port E-RTGC and solar power of refrigerated container are in utilization in

the Hakata Port

234 Korea

In Busan Port a set of Green Port took implementation such as LNG truck

E-RTGC equipment utilization eco-friendly transport means conversion (rail

canal barge) and GHG emission reduction obligation Table233

21

ltTable 233gt Summary of the Main Port of Green Port Measures

COUNTRY PORT MEASURES

US

LALB Port

Green flag AMP discharge gas reduction obligation

recommends use of alternative fuels and clean fuel

funding for the development of alternative fuels facilities

by new engine development instead of NOx emissions

green truck program (reduce70-80) low-sulfur fuel

utilization restore and revitalize the Los Cerritos

Wetlands

New York

Port

AMP modernized facilities utilization high speed hybrid

yard

Auckland

Port

Incentives on the new cleaning technology containers

transportation system

Seattle Port

AMP green ship membership Tier 4 level reducing PM

by 1994 level Smart Way program Northwest Ports

Clean Air Strategy

EU Rotterdam

Port

Clean engine (barge) green ship membership carbon

footprint calculation cruise ship which under port

authority change to use low-sulfur fuel low emission

engine development and utilization Green Award AMP

ship recycling incentives

Japan

Tokyo Port

RTGC (Rubber Tired Gantry Crane) apply for the barge

between Tokyo and Yocohama shorten international

maritime container cargo transportation land distance

super eco-shipbuilding technology dissemination and

promotion green business certification operation

shippers and logistics companies support cooperation

Osaka Port AMP electrical power equipment solar power equipment

Hakata Port E-RTGC solar power utilization in refrigerated container

Korea Busan Port

LNG truck E-RTGC eco-friendly transport means

conversion (rail canal barge) GHG emission reduction

obligation

22

24 Green Port Indicators Research

As the previous section list shown Green Port measures and programs are

substantially the same

When a ship entry in the port boundary from voyage many ports give a

incentive on shifting and utilizing sulfur-low fuel and reducing the speed under

20 miles when the ship berth in the port the alternative maritime power are

provided which replace its power generation

Next in the cargo unloading and loading department the same with above

utilization of sulfur-low fuel and electrical equipment are promoted and

eco-driving education to driver is necessary what speed is fuel fully burning and

emission minimum point

In the cargo transport department in other words truck department the

replacement on aging trucks is popular in many ports aging trucks are prohibited

close to port at the same time an incentive or support function are provided on

aging replacement The automated equipments are recommended to utilize in the

Green Port like hybrid yard tractor And a perfect plan on truck running also could

reduce the idling time and against the emission of CO2

The details reference the following Table 241

23

Table241 Green Port measures in port each department

Emission reduction programs

Ship

department

Shipping

in the

port

boundary

Obligation on the utilization of sulfur-low fuel

Reform ship engine and utilize hybrid

Speed reduce in the port entrance(a off-shore fee

incentive)

Off-shore AMP

Shift utilization system of clean fuel

Unloading and loading

department

Obligation on the utilization of sulfur-low fuel

Replace electrical equipment

Eco-driving

Truck department Hybrid yard tractor utilization

Promote aging truck replacement

Minimum the idling time

Others LED light in the Port

Develop renew and recycle resource energy

The Green Port measures in this study are e-RTGC AMP AGV Green Ship

certification system incentives on the new clean technology Green Flag(speed

reduction incentive)eco-friendly transport means conversion joint distribution

the cost on account of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction polities and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

The details and definition on each Green Port measure and the relationship with

Port Competitiveness will be expressed in next chapter

24

Chapter 3 The Relationship between Port

Competitiveness and Green Port Construction

31 Port Competitiveness Literature Review

Although past studies on port selection models have focused on port selection

made by port facilities port services port rates and charge and location

Murphy made a survey between 534 shipping companies and port authorities in

1989 and between 1850 shipping companies and port authorities in 1992

Comparing with other papers Murphys got a survey among more widely

objects In his paper port selection(port competitiveness) was seen to affected by

facilities situation appropriate pilotage max ship entrance probability the

25

capability of handling non-regular cargos whether to provide information of ship

nationality or not and port services level

In French model (1979) there are two factors affecting the port selection (port

competitiveness) endogenous factor and exogenous factor In endogenous factors

there are adequacy and physical plant condition of terminal facilities terminal rate

and charges frequency and geographic coverage of ship and freight services the

capacity of connecting to inland rails or transport net and the services provides for

the shipping or logistics And exogenous factors included the size and economic

capacity of hinterland as a source exports or market for imports national

economic situation trade policy and support established by government the

situation at home and abroad

The same as Frenchs paper in Paters paper in 1990 there are endogenous and

exogenous factors too In endogenous there are the services provides for the

shipping or logistics capacity of terminal facilities situation and condition of

facilities operation strategies established by port authority convenience to utilize

And the political situation at home and abroad social change economic factor

stabilized labor and capital However in 2004 there is a tremendous change in

Peters new paper There are four parts multi-modal process interface transport

modes infrastructure Multi-model Process part includes ship entrance rapid

speed and accuracy shipper and shipping companies reactive operation flexibility

Interface includes labor power information technology and so on And there are

26

ship calls frequency and amount of fleet factors in the transport modes part In the

infrastructure part includes port facility equipments and so on

Port facilities rates and charges services inland situation and social

circumstance factors affect the port selection and competitiveness a lot from the

research until 1992 by Murphy And in Lirn and Pater research 2003-2004 the

new and detail factors are shown to us

We can clearly see the contents in next table

27

Table 311 Prevention literature research results

Influence factors

French

(1979)

Endogenous

port facilities port rate and charges calls frequency port services

port connection with inland

Exogenous

economic size of hinterland national economic situation trade

policy home and abroad situation

Willingale

(1982)

voyage distance economy size entrance to port and route port

facilities max ship entrance probability port operation rates and

charges port authority scale of port

Slack

(1985)

cost of inland transportation port proximity ship demurrage

multi-transport

Peter

(1990)

Endogenous

port facilities condition of facilities operation strategies

convenience to utilize

Exogenous

political situation social change economic factor stabilized labor

and capital

UNCTAD

(1992)

port facilities services location level of financial industry

information communication system social circumstances economic

stability

Murphy

(1992)

facilities situation appropriate pilotage max ship entrance

probability the capability of handling non-regular cargos whether to

provide information of ship nationality or not port services level

Lirn

(2003-2004)

physical and technologic facilities geopolitical location port

operation and management shipping and terminal cost

Peter

(2004)

Multi-modal Process

ship entrance rapid speed and accuracy shipper and shipping

companies reactive operation flexibility

Interface labor and capital

Transport modes ship calls frequency and amount of fleet factors

28

And there are many experts and scholars research for the influence factors to

port selection and competitiveness in Korea The specific content follows table5

Table 312 Literature research in Korean academia

Influence factors

Jeon Il-su (1992) location facilities charges service level (EDI) terminal operation

port authority

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

( 1993 )

location facilities throughput charges service operation

situation

Kim Hak-so

(1993)

export shipping amount of annual cost of each ton of cargo

marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km of

cargo loading time

import marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km

of cargo amount of liner ship

Yeo Gi-tae (1996) location facilities throughput charge service operation situation

Ha Dong-u amp

Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

location facilities service level logistics charges environment of

logistics service

Yeo Gi-tae (1999) location facilities throughput charges service

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

throughput quay length yard area GNP

Kum Jong-su

(2001)

distance between port and cargo site terminal facilities service

the capacity of multi-transport capacity of cargo handling

administrative service rates and charges of inland transport

congestion

Yeo Gi-tae (2002) location throughput facilities service level

Kim Jin-gu (2002) port facilities location cargo amount rates and charges services

29

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005)

voyage degree to attract cargo cargo handling cost amount of

handling cargo connection to inland service reliability location

berth availability quay length feeder network depth

transshipment volumes cargo security profitability

offing degree to attract cargo berth availability cargo handling

cost transshipment volumes

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005)

cargo handling amount port facilities location rates and charges

level of service

Heo Yun-su

(2005)

port facilities rates and charges services marketing geopolitics

location economic and social circumstance

Kim Geun-seop

(2007)

port services facilities cargo handling amount location cost

productivity factor global factor

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) rates and charges services port characteristics

Many experts and scholars make a research on port selection and

competitiveness recently But the factors selection criteria are difference

Nevertheless the main factors are facilities services cost and so on

Therefore port competitiveness factors which chose in this study are port

facilities port services port rates and charges and social circumstance

However the main factors are not the whole factors any more more and more

detail factors and characteristic factors appearance Port selection and

competitiveness factors have changed And the development content is introduced

in next part

30

32 Port Competitiveness Development Tree

As mentioned above port facilities port rates and charges and port location are

the basic factors in the port selection and competitiveness

From the following table we can discover that first one facilities rates and

charges and location are the most important factor in port selection and

competitiveness second one the importance of social circumstance turns larger

inland connection is necessary all the time

Table 321 Main factor in the Pretentious Research

31

port facilities rates and

charges

inland

connection

social

circumstance location

French (1979) radic radic radic

Wiliingale (1982) radic radic

Slack (1985) radic

Pater (1990) radic radic

UNCTAD (1992) radic radic radic

Murphy(1992) radic

Jeon Il-su (1992) radic radic radic

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

(1993)

radic radic radic

Kim Hak-so

(1993) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1996) radic radic radic

Ha Dong-u

amp Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1998) radic radic radic

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

radic

Kum Jong-su

(2001) radic radic radic radic

Kim Jin-gu(2002) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(2002) radic radic

Lirn(2003-2004) radic radic radic

Pater(2004) radic

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005) radic radic radic

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005) radic radic radic

Heo Yun-su

(2005) radic radic radic radic

Kim Geun-seop

(2007) radic radic radic radic

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) radic

32

33 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green

Port Construction

Following the research above Port facilities rates and charges inland

connection and social circumstance are chose in this study port selection and

competitiveness department

e-RTGC Electric rubber tired gantry crane is a mobile gantry crane used for

stacking intermodal containers within the stacking areas of a container terminal

e-RTGC are used at container terminals and container storage yards to straddling

multiple lanes of railroad and container storage or when maximum storage

density in the container stack is desired

AMP is shorted for Alternative Marine Power and Itrsquos a facility which

provides the electric system in the land for ship which entry in the port The

facility can reduce emissions which ship get entrance in the port

AGV is a mobile robot that follows markers or wires in the floor or uses

vision or lasers They are most often used in industrial applications to move

materials around a manufacturing facility or a warehouse Automatic Guided

Vehicle systems work around-the-clock making continuous flow and just-in-time

delivery easier to achieve Application of the automatic guided vehicle has broade

33

ned during the late 20th century and they are no longer restricted to industrial

environments

The e-RTGC AMP and AGV are the new clean facilities and equipments in the

Green Port they donrsquot reduce the efficiency of handling cargo and they also

reduce the CO2 emission account

Green ship certification system if a ship utilizes clean and CO2 emission

reduction technology on the ship building adds equipment and management and

son on certification would be received And the port authority gives some

incentive and preferential treatment among 45 ports Such as a better schedule is

provided for green membership ship priority in handing cargo and discount on

entrance fee

Incentives on the new cleaning technology There are two expressions about

this measure one is that the port authority give a incentive to ship which have a

great utilization on the new cleaning technology and the other one is that

environment provide many incentives to the authority which utilize the new

cleaning technology in the port such as LED street lamp solar power cranes

Green flag The Green Flag incentive program was set up to encourage ships to

slow down in order to improve air quality The Green Flag program provides

approximately $2 million a year in discounts for vessel operators who slow their

ships to 12 knots (22kmh) or less within 20miles (32km) of the harbor

34

According to the Port the Green Flag program reduced air pollution by 600tons in

2007 and is expected to do better in 2008

All of Green ship certification system incentives on the new cleaning

technology and Green Flag are incentives provided for users of port and aimed at

reduce port rates and charges So the 3 measures belong to affect port rates and

charges

Eco-friendly transport means conversion Eco-friendly means of transport are

much accounted of green port for example railway discharge less GHG emission

than truck barge with a clean engine among the river and inshore canal

Joint distribution joint distribution is a collaborative system which port

provides among many logistics companies It can make the cargo handling speed

rapidly and reduce cargo storage time for CO2 emission reducing such as

refrigerated container In an addition it also makes the logistics companies

transport more efficient

Cost on amount of CO2 emission differenced from other port the cost on

amount of CO2 is included in the port cost The cost aims to reduce the CO2

emission directly

CO2 emission reduction policies compared with other traditional port Green

Port gives more cost discount and incentives but in an addition there are many

policies on CO2 emission restriction Such as aging trucks restrictions in inland

transport department ship entry speed reduced and fuel changed in the ship

35

department and so on Whether these restriction policies constrain port

development or not and the degree of these policies constrain port development

will be explain by the AHP results

Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors some ports in the

western countries are opened as a travel place for visitors so as to change the

polluted impress and raise the position in our heart

Cost on amount of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction policies and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors can affect the social

circumstance factor Whether these measures can or not improve the social

circumstance and port competitiveness we have to see the next calculation and

results

36

Chapter 4 The Green Port Competitiveness

Analysis

41 The Green Port Competitiveness Model by AHP

The AHP is one multi-criteria decision making method which has been

extensively applied to a variety of decision-making situations The multi-criteria

techniques are considered to be a promising framework for evaluation of

decision-making factors since they have the potential to take into account

conflicting multidimensional incommensurable and uncertain effects of

decisions explicitly

In order to apply the AHP method a hierarchical decision schema was

constructed by decomposing the decision problem into its decision elements

37

After that the importance or preferences of the decision elements are examined in

a pair-wise comparison to the elements in the hierarchy The parameters are

estimated using pair-wise comparisons between the importance of the attribute or

decision element in the function using data made by each responder Making

comparisons is a question of which of the two attributes is more import as well as

how much more important

Follow these theories the Green Port Competitiveness Model choose factors as

follow in port competitiveness factors part there are port facilities port rates and

charges inland connection social circumstance in Green Port construction part

there are e-RTGC AMP AGV green ship certification system green flag

incentives on the new cleaning technology eco-friendly transport means

conversion joint distribution CO2 emission reduction policies cost on amount of

CO2 emission beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

38

Figure 41 Green Port Competitiveness AHP model

Follow the Green Port Competitiveness AHP as shown we set a questionnaire

survey to many experts scholars working in logistics system area And we got 15

ones and 14 ones results are believable and integrated

42 Green Port Competitiveness Analysis

39

The key to construction of the factors which affects the port competitiveness

is to determine the conceptual model The selection of the factors directly affects

the evaluation of the result In order to ensure the accuracy objectivity and

practicality of evaluation results the following basic principles must be followed

when selecting factors systematic principles the principle of universal

comparability practical principle and goal-oriented principle In view of the

foregoing the competitiveness which affected by Green Port construction model

is made The analysis follows established principles of port competitiveness

evaluation taking into account the characteristics and functions of the port as well

as port facilities port services port rates and charges ship entrance inland

connection social circumstances and so on

(1) Port facilities

e-RTGC U11 AMP U12 AGV U13

(2) Port rates and charges

Green ship certification system U21 Incentives on the new clean

technology U22 Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

(3) Inland connection

Eco-friendly means of transport U31 Joint distribution U32

(4) Social circumstances

40

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41 CO2 emission reduction policies

U42 Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors U43

Table 421 Details of Level I and Level II values

Level I

indicators Symbol Level II indicators Symbol

Port facilities A1

e-RTGC U11

AMP U12

AGV U13

Port rates and

charges A2

Green ship certification system U21

Incentives on the new clean technology U22

Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

Inland

connection A3

Eco-friendly means of transport U31

Joint distribution U32

Social

circumstances A4

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41

CO2 emissions reduction policies U42

Beautiful environment construction in inner

harbors U43

41

I Determination of level I indicator weights

As the ports competitiveness evaluation indicators at this level are complex

and the elements are not easily quantified AHP is adopted to determine the

indicator weights with the basic steps as follows

(1) Establish a comparative judgment matrix The comparative judgment

matrix is obtained through comparing contributed proportion of multiple

indicators to the overall target by the judgment scale wherein the fuzzy

judgment number introduced is 1 3 5 7 and 9 and the reciprocal of

such number indicates the important degree of one element relatively to

another The results are shown in next table

Table 422 Comparison matrix of level I indicators

A1 A2 A3 A4

A1 1 15 13 3

A2 5 1 3 7

A3 3 13 1 5

A4 13 17 15 1

(2) Calculate the characteristic vector of the comparative judgment matrix

which refers to the weighted vector of the indicator The writer adopts

42

the geometric method to calculate the characteristic vector The

calculated result is as follows

ω=(012 0560 026 006)T λmax=418 It can be obtained from the table

RI=09 Wherein ω is the characteristic vector corresponding to the

maximum characteristic value λmax of the comparative judgment matrix

namely the weighted vector of the indicator RI is the average

consistency indicator as shown in following table

Table423 Average random consistency indicator RI

Matrix Order

RI

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

0 0 058 09 112 124 132 141

Matrix Order

RI

9 10 11 12 13 14 15

145 149 152 154 156 158 159

(3) Conduct consistency check on the comparative judgment matrix Adopt

the random consistency proportion CR to judge the consistency of the

comparative judgment matrix According to CI= (λmax -n)(n-1) and

CR=CIRI it can be obtained through calculation CR=007lt01 Thus

this comparative judgment matrix has a satisfactory consistency and the

indicator weight coefficient calculated through this matrix is acceptable

43

II Determination of level II indicator weights

The data at this level are the details of level Ⅰ indicator The judgment

matrix obtained through comparing multiple sub-indicators under Level Ⅰ

indicators is adopted to determine the weights of sub-indicators under each

indicator one by one The specific steps are as follows

(1) The experts score the weights within the given range To determine the

weights of several small indicators under the same big indicator it is

supposed that the score of small indicator ｋ under the indicator j made

by the expert i is Xijk wherein i=12n n is the total number of

experts ј=12m m is the total number of LevelⅡ indicator к

=12Oj Oj is the number of small indicators under the big indicator ј

іјк IJK LRC l I j k

(2) The credit rating of the expert і is l l =1 2 3 l =1 indicates this expert

is quite familiar with the evaluated contents l =2 indicator this expert is

44

with the evaluated contents l =3 indicates this expert is not quite familiar

with the evaluated contents yi1 is the=08 yi2 =05 and yi3=1

(3) The comprehensive evaluation score of small indicator l under the

indicator j is as follows

(4) The formula for normalization processing of indicator weights is as

follows and the absolute weight of the indicator set is marked as

q=(q1q2q11)

(5) Because of the same justification and principle we donrsquot give the detail

about the calculation The same with the level Ⅰ calculation we

manipulation data one by one and get 14 results And obtain the average

45

results by weighted average method The results detail as Table for the

final weights of Level-Ⅱ evaluation indicators

Above the calculation process and method are just one of data from the

questionable surveys In this study the final results are got from the

weighted average by the results of each questionable survey

The final results are shown as Table424

Table424 Indicator weights table of indicator system

Level I

indicators Weight LevelⅡ indicators

Relative

weight

Absolute

weight

Importance

percentage

Port Facilities

A1 02735

e-RTGC U11 05506 01506 1506

AMP U12 01648 00451 451

AGV U13 02826 00773 773

Port Rates and

Charges A2

02902

Green ship certification s

ystem U21 04724 01371 1371

Incentives on the new

clean technology U22 02871 00833 833

Green Flag (speed

reduction incentive)U23 02405 00698 698

Inland

connection A3

02865

Eco-friendly means of

transport U31 05942 01702 1702

Joint distribution U32 04058 01163 1163

Social

environmentA4 00863

Cost on amount of CO2

emission U41 03698 00319 319

CO2 emissions reduction

policies U42 02273 00196 196

Beautiful environment

construction in inner

harbors U43

04029 00348 348

46

III Case study

In the questionable survey we also got the mark of Green Port measures

evaluation value of many main ports such as Singapore Port Shanghai Port

Hongkong Port Busan Port LALB Port Rotterdam Port and Yocohama Port

The highest mark is 5 and lowest one is 1

Table425 Evaluation value of many main ports

Singapore

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

LALB

Port

Rotterdam

Port

Yocohama

Port

Port facilities 38000 36000 34000 38182 38000 42000 32000

Port rates and

charges 32000 36000 31000 35455 32000 39000 33000

Inland

connection 39000 34545 35000 29091 35000 45000 36000

Social

circumstance 42000 32727 41000 32000 38000 42727 36000

With the Green Port and Port competitiveness indicator weights results these

ports got the final evaluation value

47

Table426 Final evaluation value on main ports Green Port measures and

competitiveness

Rotterdam

Port

Singapore

Port

LALB

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

Yocohama

Port

394 345 330 330 319 318 317

43 Results Analysis

From the results table we can obtain the many results as following

① The main Green Port measures which are more important to improve port

competitiveness are Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system the indicator weights are 01702 01506 and

01371 among the 11 indicators

② In the Green Port construction Cost on amount of CO2 emission and CO2

emissions reduction policies are the restrictions indicators but the weight

of two indicators are not big 00319 and 00196 So effect on Green Port

construction to port competitiveness does have the weaken capacity but

not clearly strengthen more clearly Thus Green Port construction really

could improve the port competitiveness

48

③ In the case study traditional ports Rotterdam and Singapore Port give us

better examples on Green Port construction especially Rotterdam Port

④ Hongkong Busan and Yocohama Port all got a lower evaluation value

But in detail Hongkong and Yocohama Port got a lower on the port

facilities and rates and charges Busan Port got a higher on the port

facilities and rates and charges but a lower on the inland connection and

social circumstance

⑤ Shanghai Port doesnrsquot have Particular strength factors but the

comprehensive strength is not bad the same as LALB Port

49

Chapter 5 Conclusion

In this thesis the effects of Green Port construction for improving the port

competitiveness have been studied Under the definition of Green Port the

characteristics of Green Port and its effects has been shown by analysing the AHP

method which based on the questionary survey for Green Port specialists and port

officers

Follow the results of analysis on Green Port competitiveness AHP model

Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green ship certification system is

better for Green Port Construction welcome for shipping companies and citizens

who live around the port And in the analysis of Port competitiveness factors port

rates and charges always affects port competitiveness a lot As a trend inland

connection factor abstracts more attention of shipping companies

50

On the trend of port department each port should take a activity to adjust

strategy for improving its competitiveness Such as in the main ports evaluation

Busan port get a high value on port rates and charges and port facilities but as a

lower value on inland connection factor the final value is not as well as we look

forward In the evaluation of Singapore Port through it gets a lower value on rates

and charges higher value on inland connection and social circumstance causes the

final value are better So the Green Port Construction may be a trend in port

department

In the results of this thesis Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system are better solutions for Green Port Construction And

especially it can be verified that the port rates and charges always affects port

competitiveness Futhermore the investment for Green Port construction and its

effects have to be verified in the future

51

References

1 Hoyle B S and Smith J 1992 Transport and Development In Modern

transport geography edited by B S Hoyle R D Knowles (London Belhaven

Press)pp11-31

2 Beresford A K C De Souza A J R G and Pettit S J 2005 Stategic

development of liner shipping companies and terminal operators Ocean yearbook

19(Chicago 1L The University of Chicago Press) pp 732-750

3 Heaver T D 2002 Supply chain and logistics management implications for

liner shipping In The handbook of maritime economics and business edited by C

Grammenos (LondonLLP) pp 375-396

4 Park T E (2011) A Study on selection criteria of Green Port and evaluation of

major Korean port A masters thesis of graduate school of Incheon university

52

5 JeongBH (2009)Green port management policy directions in the green

growth era- The case of Gwangyang port in Republic of Korea Journal of Korea

Port Economic Association Vol25(3) p361-384

6 Lee J S Han N H(2009) A study on Green Port Revitalization According to

Air Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

7 Lee Y K Nan J W(2010)Green Logistics Policy Analysis and Implications

of Japan

8 Lee B S (2010)Tendency and Countermeasures on Green Logistics in Port

Logistics Company A masters thesis of graduate school of Korean Maritime

university

9 Lee J S (2009) A Study on Green Port Revitalization According to Air

Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

10 Zhang F Y Li Z Lu X J Yao X L(2008)Competitiveness of Inland

Ports Based on F-AHP

11 Port of Long Beach (2009) Green Port Policy wwwpolbcom

12 The port of Los Angeles wwwportoflosangelesorg

17

232 EU

Rotterdam Port

As the biggest Port in EU Rotterdam Port takes more affords in reducing the

CO2 emission Main programs are low carbon footprint AMP and so on The

limitation of CO2 emission reduces down 50 of 1990 by 2025

In July 2008 the authority of Rotterdam port gave international cooperation

with other ports an extra boost by organizing the World Ports Climate Conference

During this conference the authority of Rotterdam discussed possible ways in

which ports and business could reduce air pollution and CO2 emissions The

proposals the authority of Rotterdam was set out in a declaration which was

supported by all 55 port cities attending the conference The conference resulted

in five projects to improve air quality and reduce CO2 emissions The authority of

Rotterdam is behind the project to further elaborate an Environmental Ship Index

The Rotterdam Climate Initiative is a joint venture with the municipality of

Rotterdam DCMR Environmental Protection Agency Rijnmond and Deltalinqs

Common goal is to halve CO2 emissions in the region by 2025 in comparison with

1990 levels In connection with the Rotterdam Climate Initiative the port works

on (together with DCMR and others) creating an infrastructure for the capture

18

transport and storage of CO2 A business case presented in the summer of 2008 is

now being elaborated into a business plan The business case concludes that

Rotterdam can begin in 2015 with the capture transport and underground storage

of five million tons of CO2 per annum This means that the basic infrastructure

will then be in place for further growth in capture and storage to twenty million

tons in 2025

In 2008 a start was made on the development of a sustainability index for

activities relating to the P for Planet (environment) In 2009 it will further expand

the index to cover the P for People and the P for Profit In the first phase of the

sustainability index CO2 footprint sustainable purchasing sustainable building

and sustainable land allocation will be covered

233 Japan

① Tacoma Port

In the Tacoma Port there are some programs on protecting the air water and

soil environment

In the air protection department ldquoNorthwest Ports Clean Air Strategyrdquo

ldquoGreen Gateway for Traderdquo and ldquoTruck Programrdquo had brought out to against air

pollution The concepts include using ultra-low sulfur diesel bio-diesel and other

cleaner-burning fuels in cargo-handling equipment using low-sulfur distillate

19

fuels at berth adding ldquogreen designrdquo environmental features to ships including

diesel-electric motors that save up to 30 percent in fuel and significantly reduce

emissions setting targets to change older less-efficient truck engines installing

anti-idling devices on rail-switching engines as well as partnering on other

innovative technological advance

The Port of Tacomarsquos four dockside rail yards move cargo quickly and

efficiently from container terminals They also reduce the number of trucks on

city streets and highways Each full train that leaves the Port represents 250 to 300

trucks not on our roads reducing roadway congestion and diesel emissions The

lowest emission route to ship cargo from Asia to the US Midwest is through the

Puget Sound according to the results of a study by Herbert Engineering released

in May 2009

And in the land protection program there are successful clean projects open

spaces and future habitat restoration In 2007 the Port purchased about 70 acres

of open space known as Juliarsquos Gulch and Storey Pit located between the

Tideflats and residential Northeast Tacoma Monitor water quality system is in

utilization in the water department in Tacoma Port

② Tokyo Port

In the Tokyo Port Green Port programs are almost similar with Tacoma Port

e-RTGC (Rubber Tired Gantry Crane) the barge between Tokyo and Yocohama

20

which shorten international maritime container cargo transportation land distance

super eco-shipbuilding technology dissemination and promotion green business

certification operation and shippers and logistics companies support cooperation

③ Osaka Port and Hakata Port

AMP electrical power equipment and solar power equipment are in utilization in

Osaka Port E-RTGC and solar power of refrigerated container are in utilization in

the Hakata Port

234 Korea

In Busan Port a set of Green Port took implementation such as LNG truck

E-RTGC equipment utilization eco-friendly transport means conversion (rail

canal barge) and GHG emission reduction obligation Table233

21

ltTable 233gt Summary of the Main Port of Green Port Measures

COUNTRY PORT MEASURES

US

LALB Port

Green flag AMP discharge gas reduction obligation

recommends use of alternative fuels and clean fuel

funding for the development of alternative fuels facilities

by new engine development instead of NOx emissions

green truck program (reduce70-80) low-sulfur fuel

utilization restore and revitalize the Los Cerritos

Wetlands

New York

Port

AMP modernized facilities utilization high speed hybrid

yard

Auckland

Port

Incentives on the new cleaning technology containers

transportation system

Seattle Port

AMP green ship membership Tier 4 level reducing PM

by 1994 level Smart Way program Northwest Ports

Clean Air Strategy

EU Rotterdam

Port

Clean engine (barge) green ship membership carbon

footprint calculation cruise ship which under port

authority change to use low-sulfur fuel low emission

engine development and utilization Green Award AMP

ship recycling incentives

Japan

Tokyo Port

RTGC (Rubber Tired Gantry Crane) apply for the barge

between Tokyo and Yocohama shorten international

maritime container cargo transportation land distance

super eco-shipbuilding technology dissemination and

promotion green business certification operation

shippers and logistics companies support cooperation

Osaka Port AMP electrical power equipment solar power equipment

Hakata Port E-RTGC solar power utilization in refrigerated container

Korea Busan Port

LNG truck E-RTGC eco-friendly transport means

conversion (rail canal barge) GHG emission reduction

obligation

22

24 Green Port Indicators Research

As the previous section list shown Green Port measures and programs are

substantially the same

When a ship entry in the port boundary from voyage many ports give a

incentive on shifting and utilizing sulfur-low fuel and reducing the speed under

20 miles when the ship berth in the port the alternative maritime power are

provided which replace its power generation

Next in the cargo unloading and loading department the same with above

utilization of sulfur-low fuel and electrical equipment are promoted and

eco-driving education to driver is necessary what speed is fuel fully burning and

emission minimum point

In the cargo transport department in other words truck department the

replacement on aging trucks is popular in many ports aging trucks are prohibited

close to port at the same time an incentive or support function are provided on

aging replacement The automated equipments are recommended to utilize in the

Green Port like hybrid yard tractor And a perfect plan on truck running also could

reduce the idling time and against the emission of CO2

The details reference the following Table 241

23

Table241 Green Port measures in port each department

Emission reduction programs

Ship

department

Shipping

in the

port

boundary

Obligation on the utilization of sulfur-low fuel

Reform ship engine and utilize hybrid

Speed reduce in the port entrance(a off-shore fee

incentive)

Off-shore AMP

Shift utilization system of clean fuel

Unloading and loading

department

Obligation on the utilization of sulfur-low fuel

Replace electrical equipment

Eco-driving

Truck department Hybrid yard tractor utilization

Promote aging truck replacement

Minimum the idling time

Others LED light in the Port

Develop renew and recycle resource energy

The Green Port measures in this study are e-RTGC AMP AGV Green Ship

certification system incentives on the new clean technology Green Flag(speed

reduction incentive)eco-friendly transport means conversion joint distribution

the cost on account of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction polities and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

The details and definition on each Green Port measure and the relationship with

Port Competitiveness will be expressed in next chapter

24

Chapter 3 The Relationship between Port

Competitiveness and Green Port Construction

31 Port Competitiveness Literature Review

Although past studies on port selection models have focused on port selection

made by port facilities port services port rates and charge and location

Murphy made a survey between 534 shipping companies and port authorities in

1989 and between 1850 shipping companies and port authorities in 1992

Comparing with other papers Murphys got a survey among more widely

objects In his paper port selection(port competitiveness) was seen to affected by

facilities situation appropriate pilotage max ship entrance probability the

25

capability of handling non-regular cargos whether to provide information of ship

nationality or not and port services level

In French model (1979) there are two factors affecting the port selection (port

competitiveness) endogenous factor and exogenous factor In endogenous factors

there are adequacy and physical plant condition of terminal facilities terminal rate

and charges frequency and geographic coverage of ship and freight services the

capacity of connecting to inland rails or transport net and the services provides for

the shipping or logistics And exogenous factors included the size and economic

capacity of hinterland as a source exports or market for imports national

economic situation trade policy and support established by government the

situation at home and abroad

The same as Frenchs paper in Paters paper in 1990 there are endogenous and

exogenous factors too In endogenous there are the services provides for the

shipping or logistics capacity of terminal facilities situation and condition of

facilities operation strategies established by port authority convenience to utilize

And the political situation at home and abroad social change economic factor

stabilized labor and capital However in 2004 there is a tremendous change in

Peters new paper There are four parts multi-modal process interface transport

modes infrastructure Multi-model Process part includes ship entrance rapid

speed and accuracy shipper and shipping companies reactive operation flexibility

Interface includes labor power information technology and so on And there are

26

ship calls frequency and amount of fleet factors in the transport modes part In the

infrastructure part includes port facility equipments and so on

Port facilities rates and charges services inland situation and social

circumstance factors affect the port selection and competitiveness a lot from the

research until 1992 by Murphy And in Lirn and Pater research 2003-2004 the

new and detail factors are shown to us

We can clearly see the contents in next table

27

Table 311 Prevention literature research results

Influence factors

French

(1979)

Endogenous

port facilities port rate and charges calls frequency port services

port connection with inland

Exogenous

economic size of hinterland national economic situation trade

policy home and abroad situation

Willingale

(1982)

voyage distance economy size entrance to port and route port

facilities max ship entrance probability port operation rates and

charges port authority scale of port

Slack

(1985)

cost of inland transportation port proximity ship demurrage

multi-transport

Peter

(1990)

Endogenous

port facilities condition of facilities operation strategies

convenience to utilize

Exogenous

political situation social change economic factor stabilized labor

and capital

UNCTAD

(1992)

port facilities services location level of financial industry

information communication system social circumstances economic

stability

Murphy

(1992)

facilities situation appropriate pilotage max ship entrance

probability the capability of handling non-regular cargos whether to

provide information of ship nationality or not port services level

Lirn

(2003-2004)

physical and technologic facilities geopolitical location port

operation and management shipping and terminal cost

Peter

(2004)

Multi-modal Process

ship entrance rapid speed and accuracy shipper and shipping

companies reactive operation flexibility

Interface labor and capital

Transport modes ship calls frequency and amount of fleet factors

28

And there are many experts and scholars research for the influence factors to

port selection and competitiveness in Korea The specific content follows table5

Table 312 Literature research in Korean academia

Influence factors

Jeon Il-su (1992) location facilities charges service level (EDI) terminal operation

port authority

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

( 1993 )

location facilities throughput charges service operation

situation

Kim Hak-so

(1993)

export shipping amount of annual cost of each ton of cargo

marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km of

cargo loading time

import marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km

of cargo amount of liner ship

Yeo Gi-tae (1996) location facilities throughput charge service operation situation

Ha Dong-u amp

Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

location facilities service level logistics charges environment of

logistics service

Yeo Gi-tae (1999) location facilities throughput charges service

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

throughput quay length yard area GNP

Kum Jong-su

(2001)

distance between port and cargo site terminal facilities service

the capacity of multi-transport capacity of cargo handling

administrative service rates and charges of inland transport

congestion

Yeo Gi-tae (2002) location throughput facilities service level

Kim Jin-gu (2002) port facilities location cargo amount rates and charges services

29

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005)

voyage degree to attract cargo cargo handling cost amount of

handling cargo connection to inland service reliability location

berth availability quay length feeder network depth

transshipment volumes cargo security profitability

offing degree to attract cargo berth availability cargo handling

cost transshipment volumes

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005)

cargo handling amount port facilities location rates and charges

level of service

Heo Yun-su

(2005)

port facilities rates and charges services marketing geopolitics

location economic and social circumstance

Kim Geun-seop

(2007)

port services facilities cargo handling amount location cost

productivity factor global factor

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) rates and charges services port characteristics

Many experts and scholars make a research on port selection and

competitiveness recently But the factors selection criteria are difference

Nevertheless the main factors are facilities services cost and so on

Therefore port competitiveness factors which chose in this study are port

facilities port services port rates and charges and social circumstance

However the main factors are not the whole factors any more more and more

detail factors and characteristic factors appearance Port selection and

competitiveness factors have changed And the development content is introduced

in next part

30

32 Port Competitiveness Development Tree

As mentioned above port facilities port rates and charges and port location are

the basic factors in the port selection and competitiveness

From the following table we can discover that first one facilities rates and

charges and location are the most important factor in port selection and

competitiveness second one the importance of social circumstance turns larger

inland connection is necessary all the time

Table 321 Main factor in the Pretentious Research

31

port facilities rates and

charges

inland

connection

social

circumstance location

French (1979) radic radic radic

Wiliingale (1982) radic radic

Slack (1985) radic

Pater (1990) radic radic

UNCTAD (1992) radic radic radic

Murphy(1992) radic

Jeon Il-su (1992) radic radic radic

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

(1993)

radic radic radic

Kim Hak-so

(1993) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1996) radic radic radic

Ha Dong-u

amp Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1998) radic radic radic

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

radic

Kum Jong-su

(2001) radic radic radic radic

Kim Jin-gu(2002) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(2002) radic radic

Lirn(2003-2004) radic radic radic

Pater(2004) radic

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005) radic radic radic

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005) radic radic radic

Heo Yun-su

(2005) radic radic radic radic

Kim Geun-seop

(2007) radic radic radic radic

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) radic

32

33 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green

Port Construction

Following the research above Port facilities rates and charges inland

connection and social circumstance are chose in this study port selection and

competitiveness department

e-RTGC Electric rubber tired gantry crane is a mobile gantry crane used for

stacking intermodal containers within the stacking areas of a container terminal

e-RTGC are used at container terminals and container storage yards to straddling

multiple lanes of railroad and container storage or when maximum storage

density in the container stack is desired

AMP is shorted for Alternative Marine Power and Itrsquos a facility which

provides the electric system in the land for ship which entry in the port The

facility can reduce emissions which ship get entrance in the port

AGV is a mobile robot that follows markers or wires in the floor or uses

vision or lasers They are most often used in industrial applications to move

materials around a manufacturing facility or a warehouse Automatic Guided

Vehicle systems work around-the-clock making continuous flow and just-in-time

delivery easier to achieve Application of the automatic guided vehicle has broade

33

ned during the late 20th century and they are no longer restricted to industrial

environments

The e-RTGC AMP and AGV are the new clean facilities and equipments in the

Green Port they donrsquot reduce the efficiency of handling cargo and they also

reduce the CO2 emission account

Green ship certification system if a ship utilizes clean and CO2 emission

reduction technology on the ship building adds equipment and management and

son on certification would be received And the port authority gives some

incentive and preferential treatment among 45 ports Such as a better schedule is

provided for green membership ship priority in handing cargo and discount on

entrance fee

Incentives on the new cleaning technology There are two expressions about

this measure one is that the port authority give a incentive to ship which have a

great utilization on the new cleaning technology and the other one is that

environment provide many incentives to the authority which utilize the new

cleaning technology in the port such as LED street lamp solar power cranes

Green flag The Green Flag incentive program was set up to encourage ships to

slow down in order to improve air quality The Green Flag program provides

approximately $2 million a year in discounts for vessel operators who slow their

ships to 12 knots (22kmh) or less within 20miles (32km) of the harbor

34

According to the Port the Green Flag program reduced air pollution by 600tons in

2007 and is expected to do better in 2008

All of Green ship certification system incentives on the new cleaning

technology and Green Flag are incentives provided for users of port and aimed at

reduce port rates and charges So the 3 measures belong to affect port rates and

charges

Eco-friendly transport means conversion Eco-friendly means of transport are

much accounted of green port for example railway discharge less GHG emission

than truck barge with a clean engine among the river and inshore canal

Joint distribution joint distribution is a collaborative system which port

provides among many logistics companies It can make the cargo handling speed

rapidly and reduce cargo storage time for CO2 emission reducing such as

refrigerated container In an addition it also makes the logistics companies

transport more efficient

Cost on amount of CO2 emission differenced from other port the cost on

amount of CO2 is included in the port cost The cost aims to reduce the CO2

emission directly

CO2 emission reduction policies compared with other traditional port Green

Port gives more cost discount and incentives but in an addition there are many

policies on CO2 emission restriction Such as aging trucks restrictions in inland

transport department ship entry speed reduced and fuel changed in the ship

35

department and so on Whether these restriction policies constrain port

development or not and the degree of these policies constrain port development

will be explain by the AHP results

Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors some ports in the

western countries are opened as a travel place for visitors so as to change the

polluted impress and raise the position in our heart

Cost on amount of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction policies and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors can affect the social

circumstance factor Whether these measures can or not improve the social

circumstance and port competitiveness we have to see the next calculation and

results

36

Chapter 4 The Green Port Competitiveness

Analysis

41 The Green Port Competitiveness Model by AHP

The AHP is one multi-criteria decision making method which has been

extensively applied to a variety of decision-making situations The multi-criteria

techniques are considered to be a promising framework for evaluation of

decision-making factors since they have the potential to take into account

conflicting multidimensional incommensurable and uncertain effects of

decisions explicitly

In order to apply the AHP method a hierarchical decision schema was

constructed by decomposing the decision problem into its decision elements

37

After that the importance or preferences of the decision elements are examined in

a pair-wise comparison to the elements in the hierarchy The parameters are

estimated using pair-wise comparisons between the importance of the attribute or

decision element in the function using data made by each responder Making

comparisons is a question of which of the two attributes is more import as well as

how much more important

Follow these theories the Green Port Competitiveness Model choose factors as

follow in port competitiveness factors part there are port facilities port rates and

charges inland connection social circumstance in Green Port construction part

there are e-RTGC AMP AGV green ship certification system green flag

incentives on the new cleaning technology eco-friendly transport means

conversion joint distribution CO2 emission reduction policies cost on amount of

CO2 emission beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

38

Figure 41 Green Port Competitiveness AHP model

Follow the Green Port Competitiveness AHP as shown we set a questionnaire

survey to many experts scholars working in logistics system area And we got 15

ones and 14 ones results are believable and integrated

42 Green Port Competitiveness Analysis

39

The key to construction of the factors which affects the port competitiveness

is to determine the conceptual model The selection of the factors directly affects

the evaluation of the result In order to ensure the accuracy objectivity and

practicality of evaluation results the following basic principles must be followed

when selecting factors systematic principles the principle of universal

comparability practical principle and goal-oriented principle In view of the

foregoing the competitiveness which affected by Green Port construction model

is made The analysis follows established principles of port competitiveness

evaluation taking into account the characteristics and functions of the port as well

as port facilities port services port rates and charges ship entrance inland

connection social circumstances and so on

(1) Port facilities

e-RTGC U11 AMP U12 AGV U13

(2) Port rates and charges

Green ship certification system U21 Incentives on the new clean

technology U22 Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

(3) Inland connection

Eco-friendly means of transport U31 Joint distribution U32

(4) Social circumstances

40

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41 CO2 emission reduction policies

U42 Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors U43

Table 421 Details of Level I and Level II values

Level I

indicators Symbol Level II indicators Symbol

Port facilities A1

e-RTGC U11

AMP U12

AGV U13

Port rates and

charges A2

Green ship certification system U21

Incentives on the new clean technology U22

Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

Inland

connection A3

Eco-friendly means of transport U31

Joint distribution U32

Social

circumstances A4

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41

CO2 emissions reduction policies U42

Beautiful environment construction in inner

harbors U43

41

I Determination of level I indicator weights

As the ports competitiveness evaluation indicators at this level are complex

and the elements are not easily quantified AHP is adopted to determine the

indicator weights with the basic steps as follows

(1) Establish a comparative judgment matrix The comparative judgment

matrix is obtained through comparing contributed proportion of multiple

indicators to the overall target by the judgment scale wherein the fuzzy

judgment number introduced is 1 3 5 7 and 9 and the reciprocal of

such number indicates the important degree of one element relatively to

another The results are shown in next table

Table 422 Comparison matrix of level I indicators

A1 A2 A3 A4

A1 1 15 13 3

A2 5 1 3 7

A3 3 13 1 5

A4 13 17 15 1

(2) Calculate the characteristic vector of the comparative judgment matrix

which refers to the weighted vector of the indicator The writer adopts

42

the geometric method to calculate the characteristic vector The

calculated result is as follows

ω=(012 0560 026 006)T λmax=418 It can be obtained from the table

RI=09 Wherein ω is the characteristic vector corresponding to the

maximum characteristic value λmax of the comparative judgment matrix

namely the weighted vector of the indicator RI is the average

consistency indicator as shown in following table

Table423 Average random consistency indicator RI

Matrix Order

RI

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

0 0 058 09 112 124 132 141

Matrix Order

RI

9 10 11 12 13 14 15

145 149 152 154 156 158 159

(3) Conduct consistency check on the comparative judgment matrix Adopt

the random consistency proportion CR to judge the consistency of the

comparative judgment matrix According to CI= (λmax -n)(n-1) and

CR=CIRI it can be obtained through calculation CR=007lt01 Thus

this comparative judgment matrix has a satisfactory consistency and the

indicator weight coefficient calculated through this matrix is acceptable

43

II Determination of level II indicator weights

The data at this level are the details of level Ⅰ indicator The judgment

matrix obtained through comparing multiple sub-indicators under Level Ⅰ

indicators is adopted to determine the weights of sub-indicators under each

indicator one by one The specific steps are as follows

(1) The experts score the weights within the given range To determine the

weights of several small indicators under the same big indicator it is

supposed that the score of small indicator ｋ under the indicator j made

by the expert i is Xijk wherein i=12n n is the total number of

experts ј=12m m is the total number of LevelⅡ indicator к

=12Oj Oj is the number of small indicators under the big indicator ј

іјк IJK LRC l I j k

(2) The credit rating of the expert і is l l =1 2 3 l =1 indicates this expert

is quite familiar with the evaluated contents l =2 indicator this expert is

44

with the evaluated contents l =3 indicates this expert is not quite familiar

with the evaluated contents yi1 is the=08 yi2 =05 and yi3=1

(3) The comprehensive evaluation score of small indicator l under the

indicator j is as follows

(4) The formula for normalization processing of indicator weights is as

follows and the absolute weight of the indicator set is marked as

q=(q1q2q11)

(5) Because of the same justification and principle we donrsquot give the detail

about the calculation The same with the level Ⅰ calculation we

manipulation data one by one and get 14 results And obtain the average

45

results by weighted average method The results detail as Table for the

final weights of Level-Ⅱ evaluation indicators

Above the calculation process and method are just one of data from the

questionable surveys In this study the final results are got from the

weighted average by the results of each questionable survey

The final results are shown as Table424

Table424 Indicator weights table of indicator system

Level I

indicators Weight LevelⅡ indicators

Relative

weight

Absolute

weight

Importance

percentage

Port Facilities

A1 02735

e-RTGC U11 05506 01506 1506

AMP U12 01648 00451 451

AGV U13 02826 00773 773

Port Rates and

Charges A2

02902

Green ship certification s

ystem U21 04724 01371 1371

Incentives on the new

clean technology U22 02871 00833 833

Green Flag (speed

reduction incentive)U23 02405 00698 698

Inland

connection A3

02865

Eco-friendly means of

transport U31 05942 01702 1702

Joint distribution U32 04058 01163 1163

Social

environmentA4 00863

Cost on amount of CO2

emission U41 03698 00319 319

CO2 emissions reduction

policies U42 02273 00196 196

Beautiful environment

construction in inner

harbors U43

04029 00348 348

46

III Case study

In the questionable survey we also got the mark of Green Port measures

evaluation value of many main ports such as Singapore Port Shanghai Port

Hongkong Port Busan Port LALB Port Rotterdam Port and Yocohama Port

The highest mark is 5 and lowest one is 1

Table425 Evaluation value of many main ports

Singapore

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

LALB

Port

Rotterdam

Port

Yocohama

Port

Port facilities 38000 36000 34000 38182 38000 42000 32000

Port rates and

charges 32000 36000 31000 35455 32000 39000 33000

Inland

connection 39000 34545 35000 29091 35000 45000 36000

Social

circumstance 42000 32727 41000 32000 38000 42727 36000

With the Green Port and Port competitiveness indicator weights results these

ports got the final evaluation value

47

Table426 Final evaluation value on main ports Green Port measures and

competitiveness

Rotterdam

Port

Singapore

Port

LALB

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

Yocohama

Port

394 345 330 330 319 318 317

43 Results Analysis

From the results table we can obtain the many results as following

① The main Green Port measures which are more important to improve port

competitiveness are Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system the indicator weights are 01702 01506 and

01371 among the 11 indicators

② In the Green Port construction Cost on amount of CO2 emission and CO2

emissions reduction policies are the restrictions indicators but the weight

of two indicators are not big 00319 and 00196 So effect on Green Port

construction to port competitiveness does have the weaken capacity but

not clearly strengthen more clearly Thus Green Port construction really

could improve the port competitiveness

48

③ In the case study traditional ports Rotterdam and Singapore Port give us

better examples on Green Port construction especially Rotterdam Port

④ Hongkong Busan and Yocohama Port all got a lower evaluation value

But in detail Hongkong and Yocohama Port got a lower on the port

facilities and rates and charges Busan Port got a higher on the port

facilities and rates and charges but a lower on the inland connection and

social circumstance

⑤ Shanghai Port doesnrsquot have Particular strength factors but the

comprehensive strength is not bad the same as LALB Port

49

Chapter 5 Conclusion

In this thesis the effects of Green Port construction for improving the port

competitiveness have been studied Under the definition of Green Port the

characteristics of Green Port and its effects has been shown by analysing the AHP

method which based on the questionary survey for Green Port specialists and port

officers

Follow the results of analysis on Green Port competitiveness AHP model

Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green ship certification system is

better for Green Port Construction welcome for shipping companies and citizens

who live around the port And in the analysis of Port competitiveness factors port

rates and charges always affects port competitiveness a lot As a trend inland

connection factor abstracts more attention of shipping companies

50

On the trend of port department each port should take a activity to adjust

strategy for improving its competitiveness Such as in the main ports evaluation

Busan port get a high value on port rates and charges and port facilities but as a

lower value on inland connection factor the final value is not as well as we look

forward In the evaluation of Singapore Port through it gets a lower value on rates

and charges higher value on inland connection and social circumstance causes the

final value are better So the Green Port Construction may be a trend in port

department

In the results of this thesis Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system are better solutions for Green Port Construction And

especially it can be verified that the port rates and charges always affects port

competitiveness Futhermore the investment for Green Port construction and its

effects have to be verified in the future

51

References

1 Hoyle B S and Smith J 1992 Transport and Development In Modern

transport geography edited by B S Hoyle R D Knowles (London Belhaven

Press)pp11-31

2 Beresford A K C De Souza A J R G and Pettit S J 2005 Stategic

development of liner shipping companies and terminal operators Ocean yearbook

19(Chicago 1L The University of Chicago Press) pp 732-750

3 Heaver T D 2002 Supply chain and logistics management implications for

liner shipping In The handbook of maritime economics and business edited by C

Grammenos (LondonLLP) pp 375-396

4 Park T E (2011) A Study on selection criteria of Green Port and evaluation of

major Korean port A masters thesis of graduate school of Incheon university

52

5 JeongBH (2009)Green port management policy directions in the green

growth era- The case of Gwangyang port in Republic of Korea Journal of Korea

Port Economic Association Vol25(3) p361-384

6 Lee J S Han N H(2009) A study on Green Port Revitalization According to

Air Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

7 Lee Y K Nan J W(2010)Green Logistics Policy Analysis and Implications

of Japan

8 Lee B S (2010)Tendency and Countermeasures on Green Logistics in Port

Logistics Company A masters thesis of graduate school of Korean Maritime

university

9 Lee J S (2009) A Study on Green Port Revitalization According to Air

Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

10 Zhang F Y Li Z Lu X J Yao X L(2008)Competitiveness of Inland

Ports Based on F-AHP

11 Port of Long Beach (2009) Green Port Policy wwwpolbcom

12 The port of Los Angeles wwwportoflosangelesorg

18

transport and storage of CO2 A business case presented in the summer of 2008 is

now being elaborated into a business plan The business case concludes that

Rotterdam can begin in 2015 with the capture transport and underground storage

of five million tons of CO2 per annum This means that the basic infrastructure

will then be in place for further growth in capture and storage to twenty million

tons in 2025

In 2008 a start was made on the development of a sustainability index for

activities relating to the P for Planet (environment) In 2009 it will further expand

the index to cover the P for People and the P for Profit In the first phase of the

sustainability index CO2 footprint sustainable purchasing sustainable building

and sustainable land allocation will be covered

233 Japan

① Tacoma Port

In the Tacoma Port there are some programs on protecting the air water and

soil environment

In the air protection department ldquoNorthwest Ports Clean Air Strategyrdquo

ldquoGreen Gateway for Traderdquo and ldquoTruck Programrdquo had brought out to against air

pollution The concepts include using ultra-low sulfur diesel bio-diesel and other

cleaner-burning fuels in cargo-handling equipment using low-sulfur distillate

19

fuels at berth adding ldquogreen designrdquo environmental features to ships including

diesel-electric motors that save up to 30 percent in fuel and significantly reduce

emissions setting targets to change older less-efficient truck engines installing

anti-idling devices on rail-switching engines as well as partnering on other

innovative technological advance

The Port of Tacomarsquos four dockside rail yards move cargo quickly and

efficiently from container terminals They also reduce the number of trucks on

city streets and highways Each full train that leaves the Port represents 250 to 300

trucks not on our roads reducing roadway congestion and diesel emissions The

lowest emission route to ship cargo from Asia to the US Midwest is through the

Puget Sound according to the results of a study by Herbert Engineering released

in May 2009

And in the land protection program there are successful clean projects open

spaces and future habitat restoration In 2007 the Port purchased about 70 acres

of open space known as Juliarsquos Gulch and Storey Pit located between the

Tideflats and residential Northeast Tacoma Monitor water quality system is in

utilization in the water department in Tacoma Port

② Tokyo Port

In the Tokyo Port Green Port programs are almost similar with Tacoma Port

e-RTGC (Rubber Tired Gantry Crane) the barge between Tokyo and Yocohama

20

which shorten international maritime container cargo transportation land distance

super eco-shipbuilding technology dissemination and promotion green business

certification operation and shippers and logistics companies support cooperation

③ Osaka Port and Hakata Port

AMP electrical power equipment and solar power equipment are in utilization in

Osaka Port E-RTGC and solar power of refrigerated container are in utilization in

the Hakata Port

234 Korea

In Busan Port a set of Green Port took implementation such as LNG truck

E-RTGC equipment utilization eco-friendly transport means conversion (rail

canal barge) and GHG emission reduction obligation Table233

21

ltTable 233gt Summary of the Main Port of Green Port Measures

COUNTRY PORT MEASURES

US

LALB Port

Green flag AMP discharge gas reduction obligation

recommends use of alternative fuels and clean fuel

funding for the development of alternative fuels facilities

by new engine development instead of NOx emissions

green truck program (reduce70-80) low-sulfur fuel

utilization restore and revitalize the Los Cerritos

Wetlands

New York

Port

AMP modernized facilities utilization high speed hybrid

yard

Auckland

Port

Incentives on the new cleaning technology containers

transportation system

Seattle Port

AMP green ship membership Tier 4 level reducing PM

by 1994 level Smart Way program Northwest Ports

Clean Air Strategy

EU Rotterdam

Port

Clean engine (barge) green ship membership carbon

footprint calculation cruise ship which under port

authority change to use low-sulfur fuel low emission

engine development and utilization Green Award AMP

ship recycling incentives

Japan

Tokyo Port

RTGC (Rubber Tired Gantry Crane) apply for the barge

between Tokyo and Yocohama shorten international

maritime container cargo transportation land distance

super eco-shipbuilding technology dissemination and

promotion green business certification operation

shippers and logistics companies support cooperation

Osaka Port AMP electrical power equipment solar power equipment

Hakata Port E-RTGC solar power utilization in refrigerated container

Korea Busan Port

LNG truck E-RTGC eco-friendly transport means

conversion (rail canal barge) GHG emission reduction

obligation

22

24 Green Port Indicators Research

As the previous section list shown Green Port measures and programs are

substantially the same

When a ship entry in the port boundary from voyage many ports give a

incentive on shifting and utilizing sulfur-low fuel and reducing the speed under

20 miles when the ship berth in the port the alternative maritime power are

provided which replace its power generation

Next in the cargo unloading and loading department the same with above

utilization of sulfur-low fuel and electrical equipment are promoted and

eco-driving education to driver is necessary what speed is fuel fully burning and

emission minimum point

In the cargo transport department in other words truck department the

replacement on aging trucks is popular in many ports aging trucks are prohibited

close to port at the same time an incentive or support function are provided on

aging replacement The automated equipments are recommended to utilize in the

Green Port like hybrid yard tractor And a perfect plan on truck running also could

reduce the idling time and against the emission of CO2

The details reference the following Table 241

23

Table241 Green Port measures in port each department

Emission reduction programs

Ship

department

Shipping

in the

port

boundary

Obligation on the utilization of sulfur-low fuel

Reform ship engine and utilize hybrid

Speed reduce in the port entrance(a off-shore fee

incentive)

Off-shore AMP

Shift utilization system of clean fuel

Unloading and loading

department

Obligation on the utilization of sulfur-low fuel

Replace electrical equipment

Eco-driving

Truck department Hybrid yard tractor utilization

Promote aging truck replacement

Minimum the idling time

Others LED light in the Port

Develop renew and recycle resource energy

The Green Port measures in this study are e-RTGC AMP AGV Green Ship

certification system incentives on the new clean technology Green Flag(speed

reduction incentive)eco-friendly transport means conversion joint distribution

the cost on account of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction polities and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

The details and definition on each Green Port measure and the relationship with

Port Competitiveness will be expressed in next chapter

24

Chapter 3 The Relationship between Port

Competitiveness and Green Port Construction

31 Port Competitiveness Literature Review

Although past studies on port selection models have focused on port selection

made by port facilities port services port rates and charge and location

Murphy made a survey between 534 shipping companies and port authorities in

1989 and between 1850 shipping companies and port authorities in 1992

Comparing with other papers Murphys got a survey among more widely

objects In his paper port selection(port competitiveness) was seen to affected by

facilities situation appropriate pilotage max ship entrance probability the

25

capability of handling non-regular cargos whether to provide information of ship

nationality or not and port services level

In French model (1979) there are two factors affecting the port selection (port

competitiveness) endogenous factor and exogenous factor In endogenous factors

there are adequacy and physical plant condition of terminal facilities terminal rate

and charges frequency and geographic coverage of ship and freight services the

capacity of connecting to inland rails or transport net and the services provides for

the shipping or logistics And exogenous factors included the size and economic

capacity of hinterland as a source exports or market for imports national

economic situation trade policy and support established by government the

situation at home and abroad

The same as Frenchs paper in Paters paper in 1990 there are endogenous and

exogenous factors too In endogenous there are the services provides for the

shipping or logistics capacity of terminal facilities situation and condition of

facilities operation strategies established by port authority convenience to utilize

And the political situation at home and abroad social change economic factor

stabilized labor and capital However in 2004 there is a tremendous change in

Peters new paper There are four parts multi-modal process interface transport

modes infrastructure Multi-model Process part includes ship entrance rapid

speed and accuracy shipper and shipping companies reactive operation flexibility

Interface includes labor power information technology and so on And there are

26

ship calls frequency and amount of fleet factors in the transport modes part In the

infrastructure part includes port facility equipments and so on

Port facilities rates and charges services inland situation and social

circumstance factors affect the port selection and competitiveness a lot from the

research until 1992 by Murphy And in Lirn and Pater research 2003-2004 the

new and detail factors are shown to us

We can clearly see the contents in next table

27

Table 311 Prevention literature research results

Influence factors

French

(1979)

Endogenous

port facilities port rate and charges calls frequency port services

port connection with inland

Exogenous

economic size of hinterland national economic situation trade

policy home and abroad situation

Willingale

(1982)

voyage distance economy size entrance to port and route port

facilities max ship entrance probability port operation rates and

charges port authority scale of port

Slack

(1985)

cost of inland transportation port proximity ship demurrage

multi-transport

Peter

(1990)

Endogenous

port facilities condition of facilities operation strategies

convenience to utilize

Exogenous

political situation social change economic factor stabilized labor

and capital

UNCTAD

(1992)

port facilities services location level of financial industry

information communication system social circumstances economic

stability

Murphy

(1992)

facilities situation appropriate pilotage max ship entrance

probability the capability of handling non-regular cargos whether to

provide information of ship nationality or not port services level

Lirn

(2003-2004)

physical and technologic facilities geopolitical location port

operation and management shipping and terminal cost

Peter

(2004)

Multi-modal Process

ship entrance rapid speed and accuracy shipper and shipping

companies reactive operation flexibility

Interface labor and capital

Transport modes ship calls frequency and amount of fleet factors

28

And there are many experts and scholars research for the influence factors to

port selection and competitiveness in Korea The specific content follows table5

Table 312 Literature research in Korean academia

Influence factors

Jeon Il-su (1992) location facilities charges service level (EDI) terminal operation

port authority

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

( 1993 )

location facilities throughput charges service operation

situation

Kim Hak-so

(1993)

export shipping amount of annual cost of each ton of cargo

marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km of

cargo loading time

import marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km

of cargo amount of liner ship

Yeo Gi-tae (1996) location facilities throughput charge service operation situation

Ha Dong-u amp

Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

location facilities service level logistics charges environment of

logistics service

Yeo Gi-tae (1999) location facilities throughput charges service

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

throughput quay length yard area GNP

Kum Jong-su

(2001)

distance between port and cargo site terminal facilities service

the capacity of multi-transport capacity of cargo handling

administrative service rates and charges of inland transport

congestion

Yeo Gi-tae (2002) location throughput facilities service level

Kim Jin-gu (2002) port facilities location cargo amount rates and charges services

29

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005)

voyage degree to attract cargo cargo handling cost amount of

handling cargo connection to inland service reliability location

berth availability quay length feeder network depth

transshipment volumes cargo security profitability

offing degree to attract cargo berth availability cargo handling

cost transshipment volumes

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005)

cargo handling amount port facilities location rates and charges

level of service

Heo Yun-su

(2005)

port facilities rates and charges services marketing geopolitics

location economic and social circumstance

Kim Geun-seop

(2007)

port services facilities cargo handling amount location cost

productivity factor global factor

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) rates and charges services port characteristics

Many experts and scholars make a research on port selection and

competitiveness recently But the factors selection criteria are difference

Nevertheless the main factors are facilities services cost and so on

Therefore port competitiveness factors which chose in this study are port

facilities port services port rates and charges and social circumstance

However the main factors are not the whole factors any more more and more

detail factors and characteristic factors appearance Port selection and

competitiveness factors have changed And the development content is introduced

in next part

30

32 Port Competitiveness Development Tree

As mentioned above port facilities port rates and charges and port location are

the basic factors in the port selection and competitiveness

From the following table we can discover that first one facilities rates and

charges and location are the most important factor in port selection and

competitiveness second one the importance of social circumstance turns larger

inland connection is necessary all the time

Table 321 Main factor in the Pretentious Research

31

port facilities rates and

charges

inland

connection

social

circumstance location

French (1979) radic radic radic

Wiliingale (1982) radic radic

Slack (1985) radic

Pater (1990) radic radic

UNCTAD (1992) radic radic radic

Murphy(1992) radic

Jeon Il-su (1992) radic radic radic

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

(1993)

radic radic radic

Kim Hak-so

(1993) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1996) radic radic radic

Ha Dong-u

amp Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1998) radic radic radic

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

radic

Kum Jong-su

(2001) radic radic radic radic

Kim Jin-gu(2002) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(2002) radic radic

Lirn(2003-2004) radic radic radic

Pater(2004) radic

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005) radic radic radic

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005) radic radic radic

Heo Yun-su

(2005) radic radic radic radic

Kim Geun-seop

(2007) radic radic radic radic

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) radic

32

33 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green

Port Construction

Following the research above Port facilities rates and charges inland

connection and social circumstance are chose in this study port selection and

competitiveness department

e-RTGC Electric rubber tired gantry crane is a mobile gantry crane used for

stacking intermodal containers within the stacking areas of a container terminal

e-RTGC are used at container terminals and container storage yards to straddling

multiple lanes of railroad and container storage or when maximum storage

density in the container stack is desired

AMP is shorted for Alternative Marine Power and Itrsquos a facility which

provides the electric system in the land for ship which entry in the port The

facility can reduce emissions which ship get entrance in the port

AGV is a mobile robot that follows markers or wires in the floor or uses

vision or lasers They are most often used in industrial applications to move

materials around a manufacturing facility or a warehouse Automatic Guided

Vehicle systems work around-the-clock making continuous flow and just-in-time

delivery easier to achieve Application of the automatic guided vehicle has broade

33

ned during the late 20th century and they are no longer restricted to industrial

environments

The e-RTGC AMP and AGV are the new clean facilities and equipments in the

Green Port they donrsquot reduce the efficiency of handling cargo and they also

reduce the CO2 emission account

Green ship certification system if a ship utilizes clean and CO2 emission

reduction technology on the ship building adds equipment and management and

son on certification would be received And the port authority gives some

incentive and preferential treatment among 45 ports Such as a better schedule is

provided for green membership ship priority in handing cargo and discount on

entrance fee

Incentives on the new cleaning technology There are two expressions about

this measure one is that the port authority give a incentive to ship which have a

great utilization on the new cleaning technology and the other one is that

environment provide many incentives to the authority which utilize the new

cleaning technology in the port such as LED street lamp solar power cranes

Green flag The Green Flag incentive program was set up to encourage ships to

slow down in order to improve air quality The Green Flag program provides

approximately $2 million a year in discounts for vessel operators who slow their

ships to 12 knots (22kmh) or less within 20miles (32km) of the harbor

34

According to the Port the Green Flag program reduced air pollution by 600tons in

2007 and is expected to do better in 2008

All of Green ship certification system incentives on the new cleaning

technology and Green Flag are incentives provided for users of port and aimed at

reduce port rates and charges So the 3 measures belong to affect port rates and

charges

Eco-friendly transport means conversion Eco-friendly means of transport are

much accounted of green port for example railway discharge less GHG emission

than truck barge with a clean engine among the river and inshore canal

Joint distribution joint distribution is a collaborative system which port

provides among many logistics companies It can make the cargo handling speed

rapidly and reduce cargo storage time for CO2 emission reducing such as

refrigerated container In an addition it also makes the logistics companies

transport more efficient

Cost on amount of CO2 emission differenced from other port the cost on

amount of CO2 is included in the port cost The cost aims to reduce the CO2

emission directly

CO2 emission reduction policies compared with other traditional port Green

Port gives more cost discount and incentives but in an addition there are many

policies on CO2 emission restriction Such as aging trucks restrictions in inland

transport department ship entry speed reduced and fuel changed in the ship

35

department and so on Whether these restriction policies constrain port

development or not and the degree of these policies constrain port development

will be explain by the AHP results

Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors some ports in the

western countries are opened as a travel place for visitors so as to change the

polluted impress and raise the position in our heart

Cost on amount of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction policies and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors can affect the social

circumstance factor Whether these measures can or not improve the social

circumstance and port competitiveness we have to see the next calculation and

results

36

Chapter 4 The Green Port Competitiveness

Analysis

41 The Green Port Competitiveness Model by AHP

The AHP is one multi-criteria decision making method which has been

extensively applied to a variety of decision-making situations The multi-criteria

techniques are considered to be a promising framework for evaluation of

decision-making factors since they have the potential to take into account

conflicting multidimensional incommensurable and uncertain effects of

decisions explicitly

In order to apply the AHP method a hierarchical decision schema was

constructed by decomposing the decision problem into its decision elements

37

After that the importance or preferences of the decision elements are examined in

a pair-wise comparison to the elements in the hierarchy The parameters are

estimated using pair-wise comparisons between the importance of the attribute or

decision element in the function using data made by each responder Making

comparisons is a question of which of the two attributes is more import as well as

how much more important

Follow these theories the Green Port Competitiveness Model choose factors as

follow in port competitiveness factors part there are port facilities port rates and

charges inland connection social circumstance in Green Port construction part

there are e-RTGC AMP AGV green ship certification system green flag

incentives on the new cleaning technology eco-friendly transport means

conversion joint distribution CO2 emission reduction policies cost on amount of

CO2 emission beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

38

Figure 41 Green Port Competitiveness AHP model

Follow the Green Port Competitiveness AHP as shown we set a questionnaire

survey to many experts scholars working in logistics system area And we got 15

ones and 14 ones results are believable and integrated

42 Green Port Competitiveness Analysis

39

The key to construction of the factors which affects the port competitiveness

is to determine the conceptual model The selection of the factors directly affects

the evaluation of the result In order to ensure the accuracy objectivity and

practicality of evaluation results the following basic principles must be followed

when selecting factors systematic principles the principle of universal

comparability practical principle and goal-oriented principle In view of the

foregoing the competitiveness which affected by Green Port construction model

is made The analysis follows established principles of port competitiveness

evaluation taking into account the characteristics and functions of the port as well

as port facilities port services port rates and charges ship entrance inland

connection social circumstances and so on

(1) Port facilities

e-RTGC U11 AMP U12 AGV U13

(2) Port rates and charges

Green ship certification system U21 Incentives on the new clean

technology U22 Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

(3) Inland connection

Eco-friendly means of transport U31 Joint distribution U32

(4) Social circumstances

40

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41 CO2 emission reduction policies

U42 Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors U43

Table 421 Details of Level I and Level II values

Level I

indicators Symbol Level II indicators Symbol

Port facilities A1

e-RTGC U11

AMP U12

AGV U13

Port rates and

charges A2

Green ship certification system U21

Incentives on the new clean technology U22

Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

Inland

connection A3

Eco-friendly means of transport U31

Joint distribution U32

Social

circumstances A4

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41

CO2 emissions reduction policies U42

Beautiful environment construction in inner

harbors U43

41

I Determination of level I indicator weights

As the ports competitiveness evaluation indicators at this level are complex

and the elements are not easily quantified AHP is adopted to determine the

indicator weights with the basic steps as follows

(1) Establish a comparative judgment matrix The comparative judgment

matrix is obtained through comparing contributed proportion of multiple

indicators to the overall target by the judgment scale wherein the fuzzy

judgment number introduced is 1 3 5 7 and 9 and the reciprocal of

such number indicates the important degree of one element relatively to

another The results are shown in next table

Table 422 Comparison matrix of level I indicators

A1 A2 A3 A4

A1 1 15 13 3

A2 5 1 3 7

A3 3 13 1 5

A4 13 17 15 1

(2) Calculate the characteristic vector of the comparative judgment matrix

which refers to the weighted vector of the indicator The writer adopts

42

the geometric method to calculate the characteristic vector The

calculated result is as follows

ω=(012 0560 026 006)T λmax=418 It can be obtained from the table

RI=09 Wherein ω is the characteristic vector corresponding to the

maximum characteristic value λmax of the comparative judgment matrix

namely the weighted vector of the indicator RI is the average

consistency indicator as shown in following table

Table423 Average random consistency indicator RI

Matrix Order

RI

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

0 0 058 09 112 124 132 141

Matrix Order

RI

9 10 11 12 13 14 15

145 149 152 154 156 158 159

(3) Conduct consistency check on the comparative judgment matrix Adopt

the random consistency proportion CR to judge the consistency of the

comparative judgment matrix According to CI= (λmax -n)(n-1) and

CR=CIRI it can be obtained through calculation CR=007lt01 Thus

this comparative judgment matrix has a satisfactory consistency and the

indicator weight coefficient calculated through this matrix is acceptable

43

II Determination of level II indicator weights

The data at this level are the details of level Ⅰ indicator The judgment

matrix obtained through comparing multiple sub-indicators under Level Ⅰ

indicators is adopted to determine the weights of sub-indicators under each

indicator one by one The specific steps are as follows

(1) The experts score the weights within the given range To determine the

weights of several small indicators under the same big indicator it is

supposed that the score of small indicator ｋ under the indicator j made

by the expert i is Xijk wherein i=12n n is the total number of

experts ј=12m m is the total number of LevelⅡ indicator к

=12Oj Oj is the number of small indicators under the big indicator ј

іјк IJK LRC l I j k

(2) The credit rating of the expert і is l l =1 2 3 l =1 indicates this expert

is quite familiar with the evaluated contents l =2 indicator this expert is

44

with the evaluated contents l =3 indicates this expert is not quite familiar

with the evaluated contents yi1 is the=08 yi2 =05 and yi3=1

(3) The comprehensive evaluation score of small indicator l under the

indicator j is as follows

(4) The formula for normalization processing of indicator weights is as

follows and the absolute weight of the indicator set is marked as

q=(q1q2q11)

(5) Because of the same justification and principle we donrsquot give the detail

about the calculation The same with the level Ⅰ calculation we

manipulation data one by one and get 14 results And obtain the average

45

results by weighted average method The results detail as Table for the

final weights of Level-Ⅱ evaluation indicators

Above the calculation process and method are just one of data from the

questionable surveys In this study the final results are got from the

weighted average by the results of each questionable survey

The final results are shown as Table424

Table424 Indicator weights table of indicator system

Level I

indicators Weight LevelⅡ indicators

Relative

weight

Absolute

weight

Importance

percentage

Port Facilities

A1 02735

e-RTGC U11 05506 01506 1506

AMP U12 01648 00451 451

AGV U13 02826 00773 773

Port Rates and

Charges A2

02902

Green ship certification s

ystem U21 04724 01371 1371

Incentives on the new

clean technology U22 02871 00833 833

Green Flag (speed

reduction incentive)U23 02405 00698 698

Inland

connection A3

02865

Eco-friendly means of

transport U31 05942 01702 1702

Joint distribution U32 04058 01163 1163

Social

environmentA4 00863

Cost on amount of CO2

emission U41 03698 00319 319

CO2 emissions reduction

policies U42 02273 00196 196

Beautiful environment

construction in inner

harbors U43

04029 00348 348

46

III Case study

In the questionable survey we also got the mark of Green Port measures

evaluation value of many main ports such as Singapore Port Shanghai Port

Hongkong Port Busan Port LALB Port Rotterdam Port and Yocohama Port

The highest mark is 5 and lowest one is 1

Table425 Evaluation value of many main ports

Singapore

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

LALB

Port

Rotterdam

Port

Yocohama

Port

Port facilities 38000 36000 34000 38182 38000 42000 32000

Port rates and

charges 32000 36000 31000 35455 32000 39000 33000

Inland

connection 39000 34545 35000 29091 35000 45000 36000

Social

circumstance 42000 32727 41000 32000 38000 42727 36000

With the Green Port and Port competitiveness indicator weights results these

ports got the final evaluation value

47

Table426 Final evaluation value on main ports Green Port measures and

competitiveness

Rotterdam

Port

Singapore

Port

LALB

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

Yocohama

Port

394 345 330 330 319 318 317

43 Results Analysis

From the results table we can obtain the many results as following

① The main Green Port measures which are more important to improve port

competitiveness are Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system the indicator weights are 01702 01506 and

01371 among the 11 indicators

② In the Green Port construction Cost on amount of CO2 emission and CO2

emissions reduction policies are the restrictions indicators but the weight

of two indicators are not big 00319 and 00196 So effect on Green Port

construction to port competitiveness does have the weaken capacity but

not clearly strengthen more clearly Thus Green Port construction really

could improve the port competitiveness

48

③ In the case study traditional ports Rotterdam and Singapore Port give us

better examples on Green Port construction especially Rotterdam Port

④ Hongkong Busan and Yocohama Port all got a lower evaluation value

But in detail Hongkong and Yocohama Port got a lower on the port

facilities and rates and charges Busan Port got a higher on the port

facilities and rates and charges but a lower on the inland connection and

social circumstance

⑤ Shanghai Port doesnrsquot have Particular strength factors but the

comprehensive strength is not bad the same as LALB Port

49

Chapter 5 Conclusion

In this thesis the effects of Green Port construction for improving the port

competitiveness have been studied Under the definition of Green Port the

characteristics of Green Port and its effects has been shown by analysing the AHP

method which based on the questionary survey for Green Port specialists and port

officers

Follow the results of analysis on Green Port competitiveness AHP model

Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green ship certification system is

better for Green Port Construction welcome for shipping companies and citizens

who live around the port And in the analysis of Port competitiveness factors port

rates and charges always affects port competitiveness a lot As a trend inland

connection factor abstracts more attention of shipping companies

50

On the trend of port department each port should take a activity to adjust

strategy for improving its competitiveness Such as in the main ports evaluation

Busan port get a high value on port rates and charges and port facilities but as a

lower value on inland connection factor the final value is not as well as we look

forward In the evaluation of Singapore Port through it gets a lower value on rates

and charges higher value on inland connection and social circumstance causes the

final value are better So the Green Port Construction may be a trend in port

department

In the results of this thesis Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system are better solutions for Green Port Construction And

especially it can be verified that the port rates and charges always affects port

competitiveness Futhermore the investment for Green Port construction and its

effects have to be verified in the future

51

References

1 Hoyle B S and Smith J 1992 Transport and Development In Modern

transport geography edited by B S Hoyle R D Knowles (London Belhaven

Press)pp11-31

2 Beresford A K C De Souza A J R G and Pettit S J 2005 Stategic

development of liner shipping companies and terminal operators Ocean yearbook

19(Chicago 1L The University of Chicago Press) pp 732-750

3 Heaver T D 2002 Supply chain and logistics management implications for

liner shipping In The handbook of maritime economics and business edited by C

Grammenos (LondonLLP) pp 375-396

4 Park T E (2011) A Study on selection criteria of Green Port and evaluation of

major Korean port A masters thesis of graduate school of Incheon university

52

5 JeongBH (2009)Green port management policy directions in the green

growth era- The case of Gwangyang port in Republic of Korea Journal of Korea

Port Economic Association Vol25(3) p361-384

6 Lee J S Han N H(2009) A study on Green Port Revitalization According to

Air Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

7 Lee Y K Nan J W(2010)Green Logistics Policy Analysis and Implications

of Japan

8 Lee B S (2010)Tendency and Countermeasures on Green Logistics in Port

Logistics Company A masters thesis of graduate school of Korean Maritime

university

9 Lee J S (2009) A Study on Green Port Revitalization According to Air

Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

10 Zhang F Y Li Z Lu X J Yao X L(2008)Competitiveness of Inland

Ports Based on F-AHP

11 Port of Long Beach (2009) Green Port Policy wwwpolbcom

12 The port of Los Angeles wwwportoflosangelesorg

19

fuels at berth adding ldquogreen designrdquo environmental features to ships including

diesel-electric motors that save up to 30 percent in fuel and significantly reduce

emissions setting targets to change older less-efficient truck engines installing

anti-idling devices on rail-switching engines as well as partnering on other

innovative technological advance

The Port of Tacomarsquos four dockside rail yards move cargo quickly and

efficiently from container terminals They also reduce the number of trucks on

city streets and highways Each full train that leaves the Port represents 250 to 300

trucks not on our roads reducing roadway congestion and diesel emissions The

lowest emission route to ship cargo from Asia to the US Midwest is through the

Puget Sound according to the results of a study by Herbert Engineering released

in May 2009

And in the land protection program there are successful clean projects open

spaces and future habitat restoration In 2007 the Port purchased about 70 acres

of open space known as Juliarsquos Gulch and Storey Pit located between the

Tideflats and residential Northeast Tacoma Monitor water quality system is in

utilization in the water department in Tacoma Port

② Tokyo Port

In the Tokyo Port Green Port programs are almost similar with Tacoma Port

e-RTGC (Rubber Tired Gantry Crane) the barge between Tokyo and Yocohama

20

which shorten international maritime container cargo transportation land distance

super eco-shipbuilding technology dissemination and promotion green business

certification operation and shippers and logistics companies support cooperation

③ Osaka Port and Hakata Port

AMP electrical power equipment and solar power equipment are in utilization in

Osaka Port E-RTGC and solar power of refrigerated container are in utilization in

the Hakata Port

234 Korea

In Busan Port a set of Green Port took implementation such as LNG truck

E-RTGC equipment utilization eco-friendly transport means conversion (rail

canal barge) and GHG emission reduction obligation Table233

21

ltTable 233gt Summary of the Main Port of Green Port Measures

COUNTRY PORT MEASURES

US

LALB Port

Green flag AMP discharge gas reduction obligation

recommends use of alternative fuels and clean fuel

funding for the development of alternative fuels facilities

by new engine development instead of NOx emissions

green truck program (reduce70-80) low-sulfur fuel

utilization restore and revitalize the Los Cerritos

Wetlands

New York

Port

AMP modernized facilities utilization high speed hybrid

yard

Auckland

Port

Incentives on the new cleaning technology containers

transportation system

Seattle Port

AMP green ship membership Tier 4 level reducing PM

by 1994 level Smart Way program Northwest Ports

Clean Air Strategy

EU Rotterdam

Port

Clean engine (barge) green ship membership carbon

footprint calculation cruise ship which under port

authority change to use low-sulfur fuel low emission

engine development and utilization Green Award AMP

ship recycling incentives

Japan

Tokyo Port

RTGC (Rubber Tired Gantry Crane) apply for the barge

between Tokyo and Yocohama shorten international

maritime container cargo transportation land distance

super eco-shipbuilding technology dissemination and

promotion green business certification operation

shippers and logistics companies support cooperation

Osaka Port AMP electrical power equipment solar power equipment

Hakata Port E-RTGC solar power utilization in refrigerated container

Korea Busan Port

LNG truck E-RTGC eco-friendly transport means

conversion (rail canal barge) GHG emission reduction

obligation

22

24 Green Port Indicators Research

As the previous section list shown Green Port measures and programs are

substantially the same

When a ship entry in the port boundary from voyage many ports give a

incentive on shifting and utilizing sulfur-low fuel and reducing the speed under

20 miles when the ship berth in the port the alternative maritime power are

provided which replace its power generation

Next in the cargo unloading and loading department the same with above

utilization of sulfur-low fuel and electrical equipment are promoted and

eco-driving education to driver is necessary what speed is fuel fully burning and

emission minimum point

In the cargo transport department in other words truck department the

replacement on aging trucks is popular in many ports aging trucks are prohibited

close to port at the same time an incentive or support function are provided on

aging replacement The automated equipments are recommended to utilize in the

Green Port like hybrid yard tractor And a perfect plan on truck running also could

reduce the idling time and against the emission of CO2

The details reference the following Table 241

23

Table241 Green Port measures in port each department

Emission reduction programs

Ship

department

Shipping

in the

port

boundary

Obligation on the utilization of sulfur-low fuel

Reform ship engine and utilize hybrid

Speed reduce in the port entrance(a off-shore fee

incentive)

Off-shore AMP

Shift utilization system of clean fuel

Unloading and loading

department

Obligation on the utilization of sulfur-low fuel

Replace electrical equipment

Eco-driving

Truck department Hybrid yard tractor utilization

Promote aging truck replacement

Minimum the idling time

Others LED light in the Port

Develop renew and recycle resource energy

The Green Port measures in this study are e-RTGC AMP AGV Green Ship

certification system incentives on the new clean technology Green Flag(speed

reduction incentive)eco-friendly transport means conversion joint distribution

the cost on account of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction polities and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

The details and definition on each Green Port measure and the relationship with

Port Competitiveness will be expressed in next chapter

24

Chapter 3 The Relationship between Port

Competitiveness and Green Port Construction

31 Port Competitiveness Literature Review

Although past studies on port selection models have focused on port selection

made by port facilities port services port rates and charge and location

Murphy made a survey between 534 shipping companies and port authorities in

1989 and between 1850 shipping companies and port authorities in 1992

Comparing with other papers Murphys got a survey among more widely

objects In his paper port selection(port competitiveness) was seen to affected by

facilities situation appropriate pilotage max ship entrance probability the

25

capability of handling non-regular cargos whether to provide information of ship

nationality or not and port services level

In French model (1979) there are two factors affecting the port selection (port

competitiveness) endogenous factor and exogenous factor In endogenous factors

there are adequacy and physical plant condition of terminal facilities terminal rate

and charges frequency and geographic coverage of ship and freight services the

capacity of connecting to inland rails or transport net and the services provides for

the shipping or logistics And exogenous factors included the size and economic

capacity of hinterland as a source exports or market for imports national

economic situation trade policy and support established by government the

situation at home and abroad

The same as Frenchs paper in Paters paper in 1990 there are endogenous and

exogenous factors too In endogenous there are the services provides for the

shipping or logistics capacity of terminal facilities situation and condition of

facilities operation strategies established by port authority convenience to utilize

And the political situation at home and abroad social change economic factor

stabilized labor and capital However in 2004 there is a tremendous change in

Peters new paper There are four parts multi-modal process interface transport

modes infrastructure Multi-model Process part includes ship entrance rapid

speed and accuracy shipper and shipping companies reactive operation flexibility

Interface includes labor power information technology and so on And there are

26

ship calls frequency and amount of fleet factors in the transport modes part In the

infrastructure part includes port facility equipments and so on

Port facilities rates and charges services inland situation and social

circumstance factors affect the port selection and competitiveness a lot from the

research until 1992 by Murphy And in Lirn and Pater research 2003-2004 the

new and detail factors are shown to us

We can clearly see the contents in next table

27

Table 311 Prevention literature research results

Influence factors

French

(1979)

Endogenous

port facilities port rate and charges calls frequency port services

port connection with inland

Exogenous

economic size of hinterland national economic situation trade

policy home and abroad situation

Willingale

(1982)

voyage distance economy size entrance to port and route port

facilities max ship entrance probability port operation rates and

charges port authority scale of port

Slack

(1985)

cost of inland transportation port proximity ship demurrage

multi-transport

Peter

(1990)

Endogenous

port facilities condition of facilities operation strategies

convenience to utilize

Exogenous

political situation social change economic factor stabilized labor

and capital

UNCTAD

(1992)

port facilities services location level of financial industry

information communication system social circumstances economic

stability

Murphy

(1992)

facilities situation appropriate pilotage max ship entrance

probability the capability of handling non-regular cargos whether to

provide information of ship nationality or not port services level

Lirn

(2003-2004)

physical and technologic facilities geopolitical location port

operation and management shipping and terminal cost

Peter

(2004)

Multi-modal Process

ship entrance rapid speed and accuracy shipper and shipping

companies reactive operation flexibility

Interface labor and capital

Transport modes ship calls frequency and amount of fleet factors

28

And there are many experts and scholars research for the influence factors to

port selection and competitiveness in Korea The specific content follows table5

Table 312 Literature research in Korean academia

Influence factors

Jeon Il-su (1992) location facilities charges service level (EDI) terminal operation

port authority

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

( 1993 )

location facilities throughput charges service operation

situation

Kim Hak-so

(1993)

export shipping amount of annual cost of each ton of cargo

marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km of

cargo loading time

import marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km

of cargo amount of liner ship

Yeo Gi-tae (1996) location facilities throughput charge service operation situation

Ha Dong-u amp

Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

location facilities service level logistics charges environment of

logistics service

Yeo Gi-tae (1999) location facilities throughput charges service

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

throughput quay length yard area GNP

Kum Jong-su

(2001)

distance between port and cargo site terminal facilities service

the capacity of multi-transport capacity of cargo handling

administrative service rates and charges of inland transport

congestion

Yeo Gi-tae (2002) location throughput facilities service level

Kim Jin-gu (2002) port facilities location cargo amount rates and charges services

29

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005)

voyage degree to attract cargo cargo handling cost amount of

handling cargo connection to inland service reliability location

berth availability quay length feeder network depth

transshipment volumes cargo security profitability

offing degree to attract cargo berth availability cargo handling

cost transshipment volumes

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005)

cargo handling amount port facilities location rates and charges

level of service

Heo Yun-su

(2005)

port facilities rates and charges services marketing geopolitics

location economic and social circumstance

Kim Geun-seop

(2007)

port services facilities cargo handling amount location cost

productivity factor global factor

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) rates and charges services port characteristics

Many experts and scholars make a research on port selection and

competitiveness recently But the factors selection criteria are difference

Nevertheless the main factors are facilities services cost and so on

Therefore port competitiveness factors which chose in this study are port

facilities port services port rates and charges and social circumstance

However the main factors are not the whole factors any more more and more

detail factors and characteristic factors appearance Port selection and

competitiveness factors have changed And the development content is introduced

in next part

30

32 Port Competitiveness Development Tree

As mentioned above port facilities port rates and charges and port location are

the basic factors in the port selection and competitiveness

From the following table we can discover that first one facilities rates and

charges and location are the most important factor in port selection and

competitiveness second one the importance of social circumstance turns larger

inland connection is necessary all the time

Table 321 Main factor in the Pretentious Research

31

port facilities rates and

charges

inland

connection

social

circumstance location

French (1979) radic radic radic

Wiliingale (1982) radic radic

Slack (1985) radic

Pater (1990) radic radic

UNCTAD (1992) radic radic radic

Murphy(1992) radic

Jeon Il-su (1992) radic radic radic

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

(1993)

radic radic radic

Kim Hak-so

(1993) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1996) radic radic radic

Ha Dong-u

amp Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1998) radic radic radic

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

radic

Kum Jong-su

(2001) radic radic radic radic

Kim Jin-gu(2002) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(2002) radic radic

Lirn(2003-2004) radic radic radic

Pater(2004) radic

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005) radic radic radic

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005) radic radic radic

Heo Yun-su

(2005) radic radic radic radic

Kim Geun-seop

(2007) radic radic radic radic

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) radic

32

33 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green

Port Construction

Following the research above Port facilities rates and charges inland

connection and social circumstance are chose in this study port selection and

competitiveness department

e-RTGC Electric rubber tired gantry crane is a mobile gantry crane used for

stacking intermodal containers within the stacking areas of a container terminal

e-RTGC are used at container terminals and container storage yards to straddling

multiple lanes of railroad and container storage or when maximum storage

density in the container stack is desired

AMP is shorted for Alternative Marine Power and Itrsquos a facility which

provides the electric system in the land for ship which entry in the port The

facility can reduce emissions which ship get entrance in the port

AGV is a mobile robot that follows markers or wires in the floor or uses

vision or lasers They are most often used in industrial applications to move

materials around a manufacturing facility or a warehouse Automatic Guided

Vehicle systems work around-the-clock making continuous flow and just-in-time

delivery easier to achieve Application of the automatic guided vehicle has broade

33

ned during the late 20th century and they are no longer restricted to industrial

environments

The e-RTGC AMP and AGV are the new clean facilities and equipments in the

Green Port they donrsquot reduce the efficiency of handling cargo and they also

reduce the CO2 emission account

Green ship certification system if a ship utilizes clean and CO2 emission

reduction technology on the ship building adds equipment and management and

son on certification would be received And the port authority gives some

incentive and preferential treatment among 45 ports Such as a better schedule is

provided for green membership ship priority in handing cargo and discount on

entrance fee

Incentives on the new cleaning technology There are two expressions about

this measure one is that the port authority give a incentive to ship which have a

great utilization on the new cleaning technology and the other one is that

environment provide many incentives to the authority which utilize the new

cleaning technology in the port such as LED street lamp solar power cranes

Green flag The Green Flag incentive program was set up to encourage ships to

slow down in order to improve air quality The Green Flag program provides

approximately $2 million a year in discounts for vessel operators who slow their

ships to 12 knots (22kmh) or less within 20miles (32km) of the harbor

34

According to the Port the Green Flag program reduced air pollution by 600tons in

2007 and is expected to do better in 2008

All of Green ship certification system incentives on the new cleaning

technology and Green Flag are incentives provided for users of port and aimed at

reduce port rates and charges So the 3 measures belong to affect port rates and

charges

Eco-friendly transport means conversion Eco-friendly means of transport are

much accounted of green port for example railway discharge less GHG emission

than truck barge with a clean engine among the river and inshore canal

Joint distribution joint distribution is a collaborative system which port

provides among many logistics companies It can make the cargo handling speed

rapidly and reduce cargo storage time for CO2 emission reducing such as

refrigerated container In an addition it also makes the logistics companies

transport more efficient

Cost on amount of CO2 emission differenced from other port the cost on

amount of CO2 is included in the port cost The cost aims to reduce the CO2

emission directly

CO2 emission reduction policies compared with other traditional port Green

Port gives more cost discount and incentives but in an addition there are many

policies on CO2 emission restriction Such as aging trucks restrictions in inland

transport department ship entry speed reduced and fuel changed in the ship

35

department and so on Whether these restriction policies constrain port

development or not and the degree of these policies constrain port development

will be explain by the AHP results

Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors some ports in the

western countries are opened as a travel place for visitors so as to change the

polluted impress and raise the position in our heart

Cost on amount of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction policies and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors can affect the social

circumstance factor Whether these measures can or not improve the social

circumstance and port competitiveness we have to see the next calculation and

results

36

Chapter 4 The Green Port Competitiveness

Analysis

41 The Green Port Competitiveness Model by AHP

The AHP is one multi-criteria decision making method which has been

extensively applied to a variety of decision-making situations The multi-criteria

techniques are considered to be a promising framework for evaluation of

decision-making factors since they have the potential to take into account

conflicting multidimensional incommensurable and uncertain effects of

decisions explicitly

In order to apply the AHP method a hierarchical decision schema was

constructed by decomposing the decision problem into its decision elements

37

After that the importance or preferences of the decision elements are examined in

a pair-wise comparison to the elements in the hierarchy The parameters are

estimated using pair-wise comparisons between the importance of the attribute or

decision element in the function using data made by each responder Making

comparisons is a question of which of the two attributes is more import as well as

how much more important

Follow these theories the Green Port Competitiveness Model choose factors as

follow in port competitiveness factors part there are port facilities port rates and

charges inland connection social circumstance in Green Port construction part

there are e-RTGC AMP AGV green ship certification system green flag

incentives on the new cleaning technology eco-friendly transport means

conversion joint distribution CO2 emission reduction policies cost on amount of

CO2 emission beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

38

Figure 41 Green Port Competitiveness AHP model

Follow the Green Port Competitiveness AHP as shown we set a questionnaire

survey to many experts scholars working in logistics system area And we got 15

ones and 14 ones results are believable and integrated

42 Green Port Competitiveness Analysis

39

The key to construction of the factors which affects the port competitiveness

is to determine the conceptual model The selection of the factors directly affects

the evaluation of the result In order to ensure the accuracy objectivity and

practicality of evaluation results the following basic principles must be followed

when selecting factors systematic principles the principle of universal

comparability practical principle and goal-oriented principle In view of the

foregoing the competitiveness which affected by Green Port construction model

is made The analysis follows established principles of port competitiveness

evaluation taking into account the characteristics and functions of the port as well

as port facilities port services port rates and charges ship entrance inland

connection social circumstances and so on

(1) Port facilities

e-RTGC U11 AMP U12 AGV U13

(2) Port rates and charges

Green ship certification system U21 Incentives on the new clean

technology U22 Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

(3) Inland connection

Eco-friendly means of transport U31 Joint distribution U32

(4) Social circumstances

40

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41 CO2 emission reduction policies

U42 Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors U43

Table 421 Details of Level I and Level II values

Level I

indicators Symbol Level II indicators Symbol

Port facilities A1

e-RTGC U11

AMP U12

AGV U13

Port rates and

charges A2

Green ship certification system U21

Incentives on the new clean technology U22

Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

Inland

connection A3

Eco-friendly means of transport U31

Joint distribution U32

Social

circumstances A4

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41

CO2 emissions reduction policies U42

Beautiful environment construction in inner

harbors U43

41

I Determination of level I indicator weights

As the ports competitiveness evaluation indicators at this level are complex

and the elements are not easily quantified AHP is adopted to determine the

indicator weights with the basic steps as follows

(1) Establish a comparative judgment matrix The comparative judgment

matrix is obtained through comparing contributed proportion of multiple

indicators to the overall target by the judgment scale wherein the fuzzy

judgment number introduced is 1 3 5 7 and 9 and the reciprocal of

such number indicates the important degree of one element relatively to

another The results are shown in next table

Table 422 Comparison matrix of level I indicators

A1 A2 A3 A4

A1 1 15 13 3

A2 5 1 3 7

A3 3 13 1 5

A4 13 17 15 1

(2) Calculate the characteristic vector of the comparative judgment matrix

which refers to the weighted vector of the indicator The writer adopts

42

the geometric method to calculate the characteristic vector The

calculated result is as follows

ω=(012 0560 026 006)T λmax=418 It can be obtained from the table

RI=09 Wherein ω is the characteristic vector corresponding to the

maximum characteristic value λmax of the comparative judgment matrix

namely the weighted vector of the indicator RI is the average

consistency indicator as shown in following table

Table423 Average random consistency indicator RI

Matrix Order

RI

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

0 0 058 09 112 124 132 141

Matrix Order

RI

9 10 11 12 13 14 15

145 149 152 154 156 158 159

(3) Conduct consistency check on the comparative judgment matrix Adopt

the random consistency proportion CR to judge the consistency of the

comparative judgment matrix According to CI= (λmax -n)(n-1) and

CR=CIRI it can be obtained through calculation CR=007lt01 Thus

this comparative judgment matrix has a satisfactory consistency and the

indicator weight coefficient calculated through this matrix is acceptable

43

II Determination of level II indicator weights

The data at this level are the details of level Ⅰ indicator The judgment

matrix obtained through comparing multiple sub-indicators under Level Ⅰ

indicators is adopted to determine the weights of sub-indicators under each

indicator one by one The specific steps are as follows

(1) The experts score the weights within the given range To determine the

weights of several small indicators under the same big indicator it is

supposed that the score of small indicator ｋ under the indicator j made

by the expert i is Xijk wherein i=12n n is the total number of

experts ј=12m m is the total number of LevelⅡ indicator к

=12Oj Oj is the number of small indicators under the big indicator ј

іјк IJK LRC l I j k

(2) The credit rating of the expert і is l l =1 2 3 l =1 indicates this expert

is quite familiar with the evaluated contents l =2 indicator this expert is

44

with the evaluated contents l =3 indicates this expert is not quite familiar

with the evaluated contents yi1 is the=08 yi2 =05 and yi3=1

(3) The comprehensive evaluation score of small indicator l under the

indicator j is as follows

(4) The formula for normalization processing of indicator weights is as

follows and the absolute weight of the indicator set is marked as

q=(q1q2q11)

(5) Because of the same justification and principle we donrsquot give the detail

about the calculation The same with the level Ⅰ calculation we

manipulation data one by one and get 14 results And obtain the average

45

results by weighted average method The results detail as Table for the

final weights of Level-Ⅱ evaluation indicators

Above the calculation process and method are just one of data from the

questionable surveys In this study the final results are got from the

weighted average by the results of each questionable survey

The final results are shown as Table424

Table424 Indicator weights table of indicator system

Level I

indicators Weight LevelⅡ indicators

Relative

weight

Absolute

weight

Importance

percentage

Port Facilities

A1 02735

e-RTGC U11 05506 01506 1506

AMP U12 01648 00451 451

AGV U13 02826 00773 773

Port Rates and

Charges A2

02902

Green ship certification s

ystem U21 04724 01371 1371

Incentives on the new

clean technology U22 02871 00833 833

Green Flag (speed

reduction incentive)U23 02405 00698 698

Inland

connection A3

02865

Eco-friendly means of

transport U31 05942 01702 1702

Joint distribution U32 04058 01163 1163

Social

environmentA4 00863

Cost on amount of CO2

emission U41 03698 00319 319

CO2 emissions reduction

policies U42 02273 00196 196

Beautiful environment

construction in inner

harbors U43

04029 00348 348

46

III Case study

In the questionable survey we also got the mark of Green Port measures

evaluation value of many main ports such as Singapore Port Shanghai Port

Hongkong Port Busan Port LALB Port Rotterdam Port and Yocohama Port

The highest mark is 5 and lowest one is 1

Table425 Evaluation value of many main ports

Singapore

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

LALB

Port

Rotterdam

Port

Yocohama

Port

Port facilities 38000 36000 34000 38182 38000 42000 32000

Port rates and

charges 32000 36000 31000 35455 32000 39000 33000

Inland

connection 39000 34545 35000 29091 35000 45000 36000

Social

circumstance 42000 32727 41000 32000 38000 42727 36000

With the Green Port and Port competitiveness indicator weights results these

ports got the final evaluation value

47

Table426 Final evaluation value on main ports Green Port measures and

competitiveness

Rotterdam

Port

Singapore

Port

LALB

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

Yocohama

Port

394 345 330 330 319 318 317

43 Results Analysis

From the results table we can obtain the many results as following

① The main Green Port measures which are more important to improve port

competitiveness are Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system the indicator weights are 01702 01506 and

01371 among the 11 indicators

② In the Green Port construction Cost on amount of CO2 emission and CO2

emissions reduction policies are the restrictions indicators but the weight

of two indicators are not big 00319 and 00196 So effect on Green Port

construction to port competitiveness does have the weaken capacity but

not clearly strengthen more clearly Thus Green Port construction really

could improve the port competitiveness

48

③ In the case study traditional ports Rotterdam and Singapore Port give us

better examples on Green Port construction especially Rotterdam Port

④ Hongkong Busan and Yocohama Port all got a lower evaluation value

But in detail Hongkong and Yocohama Port got a lower on the port

facilities and rates and charges Busan Port got a higher on the port

facilities and rates and charges but a lower on the inland connection and

social circumstance

⑤ Shanghai Port doesnrsquot have Particular strength factors but the

comprehensive strength is not bad the same as LALB Port

49

Chapter 5 Conclusion

In this thesis the effects of Green Port construction for improving the port

competitiveness have been studied Under the definition of Green Port the

characteristics of Green Port and its effects has been shown by analysing the AHP

method which based on the questionary survey for Green Port specialists and port

officers

Follow the results of analysis on Green Port competitiveness AHP model

Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green ship certification system is

better for Green Port Construction welcome for shipping companies and citizens

who live around the port And in the analysis of Port competitiveness factors port

rates and charges always affects port competitiveness a lot As a trend inland

connection factor abstracts more attention of shipping companies

50

On the trend of port department each port should take a activity to adjust

strategy for improving its competitiveness Such as in the main ports evaluation

Busan port get a high value on port rates and charges and port facilities but as a

lower value on inland connection factor the final value is not as well as we look

forward In the evaluation of Singapore Port through it gets a lower value on rates

and charges higher value on inland connection and social circumstance causes the

final value are better So the Green Port Construction may be a trend in port

department

In the results of this thesis Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system are better solutions for Green Port Construction And

especially it can be verified that the port rates and charges always affects port

competitiveness Futhermore the investment for Green Port construction and its

effects have to be verified in the future

51

References

1 Hoyle B S and Smith J 1992 Transport and Development In Modern

transport geography edited by B S Hoyle R D Knowles (London Belhaven

Press)pp11-31

2 Beresford A K C De Souza A J R G and Pettit S J 2005 Stategic

development of liner shipping companies and terminal operators Ocean yearbook

19(Chicago 1L The University of Chicago Press) pp 732-750

3 Heaver T D 2002 Supply chain and logistics management implications for

liner shipping In The handbook of maritime economics and business edited by C

Grammenos (LondonLLP) pp 375-396

4 Park T E (2011) A Study on selection criteria of Green Port and evaluation of

major Korean port A masters thesis of graduate school of Incheon university

52

5 JeongBH (2009)Green port management policy directions in the green

growth era- The case of Gwangyang port in Republic of Korea Journal of Korea

Port Economic Association Vol25(3) p361-384

6 Lee J S Han N H(2009) A study on Green Port Revitalization According to

Air Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

7 Lee Y K Nan J W(2010)Green Logistics Policy Analysis and Implications

of Japan

8 Lee B S (2010)Tendency and Countermeasures on Green Logistics in Port

Logistics Company A masters thesis of graduate school of Korean Maritime

university

9 Lee J S (2009) A Study on Green Port Revitalization According to Air

Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

10 Zhang F Y Li Z Lu X J Yao X L(2008)Competitiveness of Inland

Ports Based on F-AHP

11 Port of Long Beach (2009) Green Port Policy wwwpolbcom

12 The port of Los Angeles wwwportoflosangelesorg

20

which shorten international maritime container cargo transportation land distance

super eco-shipbuilding technology dissemination and promotion green business

certification operation and shippers and logistics companies support cooperation

③ Osaka Port and Hakata Port

AMP electrical power equipment and solar power equipment are in utilization in

Osaka Port E-RTGC and solar power of refrigerated container are in utilization in

the Hakata Port

234 Korea

In Busan Port a set of Green Port took implementation such as LNG truck

E-RTGC equipment utilization eco-friendly transport means conversion (rail

canal barge) and GHG emission reduction obligation Table233

21

ltTable 233gt Summary of the Main Port of Green Port Measures

COUNTRY PORT MEASURES

US

LALB Port

Green flag AMP discharge gas reduction obligation

recommends use of alternative fuels and clean fuel

funding for the development of alternative fuels facilities

by new engine development instead of NOx emissions

green truck program (reduce70-80) low-sulfur fuel

utilization restore and revitalize the Los Cerritos

Wetlands

New York

Port

AMP modernized facilities utilization high speed hybrid

yard

Auckland

Port

Incentives on the new cleaning technology containers

transportation system

Seattle Port

AMP green ship membership Tier 4 level reducing PM

by 1994 level Smart Way program Northwest Ports

Clean Air Strategy

EU Rotterdam

Port

Clean engine (barge) green ship membership carbon

footprint calculation cruise ship which under port

authority change to use low-sulfur fuel low emission

engine development and utilization Green Award AMP

ship recycling incentives

Japan

Tokyo Port

RTGC (Rubber Tired Gantry Crane) apply for the barge

between Tokyo and Yocohama shorten international

maritime container cargo transportation land distance

super eco-shipbuilding technology dissemination and

promotion green business certification operation

shippers and logistics companies support cooperation

Osaka Port AMP electrical power equipment solar power equipment

Hakata Port E-RTGC solar power utilization in refrigerated container

Korea Busan Port

LNG truck E-RTGC eco-friendly transport means

conversion (rail canal barge) GHG emission reduction

obligation

22

24 Green Port Indicators Research

As the previous section list shown Green Port measures and programs are

substantially the same

When a ship entry in the port boundary from voyage many ports give a

incentive on shifting and utilizing sulfur-low fuel and reducing the speed under

20 miles when the ship berth in the port the alternative maritime power are

provided which replace its power generation

Next in the cargo unloading and loading department the same with above

utilization of sulfur-low fuel and electrical equipment are promoted and

eco-driving education to driver is necessary what speed is fuel fully burning and

emission minimum point

In the cargo transport department in other words truck department the

replacement on aging trucks is popular in many ports aging trucks are prohibited

close to port at the same time an incentive or support function are provided on

aging replacement The automated equipments are recommended to utilize in the

Green Port like hybrid yard tractor And a perfect plan on truck running also could

reduce the idling time and against the emission of CO2

The details reference the following Table 241

23

Table241 Green Port measures in port each department

Emission reduction programs

Ship

department

Shipping

in the

port

boundary

Obligation on the utilization of sulfur-low fuel

Reform ship engine and utilize hybrid

Speed reduce in the port entrance(a off-shore fee

incentive)

Off-shore AMP

Shift utilization system of clean fuel

Unloading and loading

department

Obligation on the utilization of sulfur-low fuel

Replace electrical equipment

Eco-driving

Truck department Hybrid yard tractor utilization

Promote aging truck replacement

Minimum the idling time

Others LED light in the Port

Develop renew and recycle resource energy

The Green Port measures in this study are e-RTGC AMP AGV Green Ship

certification system incentives on the new clean technology Green Flag(speed

reduction incentive)eco-friendly transport means conversion joint distribution

the cost on account of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction polities and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

The details and definition on each Green Port measure and the relationship with

Port Competitiveness will be expressed in next chapter

24

Chapter 3 The Relationship between Port

Competitiveness and Green Port Construction

31 Port Competitiveness Literature Review

Although past studies on port selection models have focused on port selection

made by port facilities port services port rates and charge and location

Murphy made a survey between 534 shipping companies and port authorities in

1989 and between 1850 shipping companies and port authorities in 1992

Comparing with other papers Murphys got a survey among more widely

objects In his paper port selection(port competitiveness) was seen to affected by

facilities situation appropriate pilotage max ship entrance probability the

25

capability of handling non-regular cargos whether to provide information of ship

nationality or not and port services level

In French model (1979) there are two factors affecting the port selection (port

competitiveness) endogenous factor and exogenous factor In endogenous factors

there are adequacy and physical plant condition of terminal facilities terminal rate

and charges frequency and geographic coverage of ship and freight services the

capacity of connecting to inland rails or transport net and the services provides for

the shipping or logistics And exogenous factors included the size and economic

capacity of hinterland as a source exports or market for imports national

economic situation trade policy and support established by government the

situation at home and abroad

The same as Frenchs paper in Paters paper in 1990 there are endogenous and

exogenous factors too In endogenous there are the services provides for the

shipping or logistics capacity of terminal facilities situation and condition of

facilities operation strategies established by port authority convenience to utilize

And the political situation at home and abroad social change economic factor

stabilized labor and capital However in 2004 there is a tremendous change in

Peters new paper There are four parts multi-modal process interface transport

modes infrastructure Multi-model Process part includes ship entrance rapid

speed and accuracy shipper and shipping companies reactive operation flexibility

Interface includes labor power information technology and so on And there are

26

ship calls frequency and amount of fleet factors in the transport modes part In the

infrastructure part includes port facility equipments and so on

Port facilities rates and charges services inland situation and social

circumstance factors affect the port selection and competitiveness a lot from the

research until 1992 by Murphy And in Lirn and Pater research 2003-2004 the

new and detail factors are shown to us

We can clearly see the contents in next table

27

Table 311 Prevention literature research results

Influence factors

French

(1979)

Endogenous

port facilities port rate and charges calls frequency port services

port connection with inland

Exogenous

economic size of hinterland national economic situation trade

policy home and abroad situation

Willingale

(1982)

voyage distance economy size entrance to port and route port

facilities max ship entrance probability port operation rates and

charges port authority scale of port

Slack

(1985)

cost of inland transportation port proximity ship demurrage

multi-transport

Peter

(1990)

Endogenous

port facilities condition of facilities operation strategies

convenience to utilize

Exogenous

political situation social change economic factor stabilized labor

and capital

UNCTAD

(1992)

port facilities services location level of financial industry

information communication system social circumstances economic

stability

Murphy

(1992)

facilities situation appropriate pilotage max ship entrance

probability the capability of handling non-regular cargos whether to

provide information of ship nationality or not port services level

Lirn

(2003-2004)

physical and technologic facilities geopolitical location port

operation and management shipping and terminal cost

Peter

(2004)

Multi-modal Process

ship entrance rapid speed and accuracy shipper and shipping

companies reactive operation flexibility

Interface labor and capital

Transport modes ship calls frequency and amount of fleet factors

28

And there are many experts and scholars research for the influence factors to

port selection and competitiveness in Korea The specific content follows table5

Table 312 Literature research in Korean academia

Influence factors

Jeon Il-su (1992) location facilities charges service level (EDI) terminal operation

port authority

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

( 1993 )

location facilities throughput charges service operation

situation

Kim Hak-so

(1993)

export shipping amount of annual cost of each ton of cargo

marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km of

cargo loading time

import marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km

of cargo amount of liner ship

Yeo Gi-tae (1996) location facilities throughput charge service operation situation

Ha Dong-u amp

Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

location facilities service level logistics charges environment of

logistics service

Yeo Gi-tae (1999) location facilities throughput charges service

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

throughput quay length yard area GNP

Kum Jong-su

(2001)

distance between port and cargo site terminal facilities service

the capacity of multi-transport capacity of cargo handling

administrative service rates and charges of inland transport

congestion

Yeo Gi-tae (2002) location throughput facilities service level

Kim Jin-gu (2002) port facilities location cargo amount rates and charges services

29

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005)

voyage degree to attract cargo cargo handling cost amount of

handling cargo connection to inland service reliability location

berth availability quay length feeder network depth

transshipment volumes cargo security profitability

offing degree to attract cargo berth availability cargo handling

cost transshipment volumes

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005)

cargo handling amount port facilities location rates and charges

level of service

Heo Yun-su

(2005)

port facilities rates and charges services marketing geopolitics

location economic and social circumstance

Kim Geun-seop

(2007)

port services facilities cargo handling amount location cost

productivity factor global factor

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) rates and charges services port characteristics

Many experts and scholars make a research on port selection and

competitiveness recently But the factors selection criteria are difference

Nevertheless the main factors are facilities services cost and so on

Therefore port competitiveness factors which chose in this study are port

facilities port services port rates and charges and social circumstance

However the main factors are not the whole factors any more more and more

detail factors and characteristic factors appearance Port selection and

competitiveness factors have changed And the development content is introduced

in next part

30

32 Port Competitiveness Development Tree

As mentioned above port facilities port rates and charges and port location are

the basic factors in the port selection and competitiveness

From the following table we can discover that first one facilities rates and

charges and location are the most important factor in port selection and

competitiveness second one the importance of social circumstance turns larger

inland connection is necessary all the time

Table 321 Main factor in the Pretentious Research

31

port facilities rates and

charges

inland

connection

social

circumstance location

French (1979) radic radic radic

Wiliingale (1982) radic radic

Slack (1985) radic

Pater (1990) radic radic

UNCTAD (1992) radic radic radic

Murphy(1992) radic

Jeon Il-su (1992) radic radic radic

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

(1993)

radic radic radic

Kim Hak-so

(1993) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1996) radic radic radic

Ha Dong-u

amp Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1998) radic radic radic

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

radic

Kum Jong-su

(2001) radic radic radic radic

Kim Jin-gu(2002) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(2002) radic radic

Lirn(2003-2004) radic radic radic

Pater(2004) radic

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005) radic radic radic

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005) radic radic radic

Heo Yun-su

(2005) radic radic radic radic

Kim Geun-seop

(2007) radic radic radic radic

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) radic

32

33 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green

Port Construction

Following the research above Port facilities rates and charges inland

connection and social circumstance are chose in this study port selection and

competitiveness department

e-RTGC Electric rubber tired gantry crane is a mobile gantry crane used for

stacking intermodal containers within the stacking areas of a container terminal

e-RTGC are used at container terminals and container storage yards to straddling

multiple lanes of railroad and container storage or when maximum storage

density in the container stack is desired

AMP is shorted for Alternative Marine Power and Itrsquos a facility which

provides the electric system in the land for ship which entry in the port The

facility can reduce emissions which ship get entrance in the port

AGV is a mobile robot that follows markers or wires in the floor or uses

vision or lasers They are most often used in industrial applications to move

materials around a manufacturing facility or a warehouse Automatic Guided

Vehicle systems work around-the-clock making continuous flow and just-in-time

delivery easier to achieve Application of the automatic guided vehicle has broade

33

ned during the late 20th century and they are no longer restricted to industrial

environments

The e-RTGC AMP and AGV are the new clean facilities and equipments in the

Green Port they donrsquot reduce the efficiency of handling cargo and they also

reduce the CO2 emission account

Green ship certification system if a ship utilizes clean and CO2 emission

reduction technology on the ship building adds equipment and management and

son on certification would be received And the port authority gives some

incentive and preferential treatment among 45 ports Such as a better schedule is

provided for green membership ship priority in handing cargo and discount on

entrance fee

Incentives on the new cleaning technology There are two expressions about

this measure one is that the port authority give a incentive to ship which have a

great utilization on the new cleaning technology and the other one is that

environment provide many incentives to the authority which utilize the new

cleaning technology in the port such as LED street lamp solar power cranes

Green flag The Green Flag incentive program was set up to encourage ships to

slow down in order to improve air quality The Green Flag program provides

approximately $2 million a year in discounts for vessel operators who slow their

ships to 12 knots (22kmh) or less within 20miles (32km) of the harbor

34

According to the Port the Green Flag program reduced air pollution by 600tons in

2007 and is expected to do better in 2008

All of Green ship certification system incentives on the new cleaning

technology and Green Flag are incentives provided for users of port and aimed at

reduce port rates and charges So the 3 measures belong to affect port rates and

charges

Eco-friendly transport means conversion Eco-friendly means of transport are

much accounted of green port for example railway discharge less GHG emission

than truck barge with a clean engine among the river and inshore canal

Joint distribution joint distribution is a collaborative system which port

provides among many logistics companies It can make the cargo handling speed

rapidly and reduce cargo storage time for CO2 emission reducing such as

refrigerated container In an addition it also makes the logistics companies

transport more efficient

Cost on amount of CO2 emission differenced from other port the cost on

amount of CO2 is included in the port cost The cost aims to reduce the CO2

emission directly

CO2 emission reduction policies compared with other traditional port Green

Port gives more cost discount and incentives but in an addition there are many

policies on CO2 emission restriction Such as aging trucks restrictions in inland

transport department ship entry speed reduced and fuel changed in the ship

35

department and so on Whether these restriction policies constrain port

development or not and the degree of these policies constrain port development

will be explain by the AHP results

Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors some ports in the

western countries are opened as a travel place for visitors so as to change the

polluted impress and raise the position in our heart

Cost on amount of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction policies and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors can affect the social

circumstance factor Whether these measures can or not improve the social

circumstance and port competitiveness we have to see the next calculation and

results

36

Chapter 4 The Green Port Competitiveness

Analysis

41 The Green Port Competitiveness Model by AHP

The AHP is one multi-criteria decision making method which has been

extensively applied to a variety of decision-making situations The multi-criteria

techniques are considered to be a promising framework for evaluation of

decision-making factors since they have the potential to take into account

conflicting multidimensional incommensurable and uncertain effects of

decisions explicitly

In order to apply the AHP method a hierarchical decision schema was

constructed by decomposing the decision problem into its decision elements

37

After that the importance or preferences of the decision elements are examined in

a pair-wise comparison to the elements in the hierarchy The parameters are

estimated using pair-wise comparisons between the importance of the attribute or

decision element in the function using data made by each responder Making

comparisons is a question of which of the two attributes is more import as well as

how much more important

Follow these theories the Green Port Competitiveness Model choose factors as

follow in port competitiveness factors part there are port facilities port rates and

charges inland connection social circumstance in Green Port construction part

there are e-RTGC AMP AGV green ship certification system green flag

incentives on the new cleaning technology eco-friendly transport means

conversion joint distribution CO2 emission reduction policies cost on amount of

CO2 emission beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

38

Figure 41 Green Port Competitiveness AHP model

Follow the Green Port Competitiveness AHP as shown we set a questionnaire

survey to many experts scholars working in logistics system area And we got 15

ones and 14 ones results are believable and integrated

42 Green Port Competitiveness Analysis

39

The key to construction of the factors which affects the port competitiveness

is to determine the conceptual model The selection of the factors directly affects

the evaluation of the result In order to ensure the accuracy objectivity and

practicality of evaluation results the following basic principles must be followed

when selecting factors systematic principles the principle of universal

comparability practical principle and goal-oriented principle In view of the

foregoing the competitiveness which affected by Green Port construction model

is made The analysis follows established principles of port competitiveness

evaluation taking into account the characteristics and functions of the port as well

as port facilities port services port rates and charges ship entrance inland

connection social circumstances and so on

(1) Port facilities

e-RTGC U11 AMP U12 AGV U13

(2) Port rates and charges

Green ship certification system U21 Incentives on the new clean

technology U22 Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

(3) Inland connection

Eco-friendly means of transport U31 Joint distribution U32

(4) Social circumstances

40

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41 CO2 emission reduction policies

U42 Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors U43

Table 421 Details of Level I and Level II values

Level I

indicators Symbol Level II indicators Symbol

Port facilities A1

e-RTGC U11

AMP U12

AGV U13

Port rates and

charges A2

Green ship certification system U21

Incentives on the new clean technology U22

Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

Inland

connection A3

Eco-friendly means of transport U31

Joint distribution U32

Social

circumstances A4

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41

CO2 emissions reduction policies U42

Beautiful environment construction in inner

harbors U43

41

I Determination of level I indicator weights

As the ports competitiveness evaluation indicators at this level are complex

and the elements are not easily quantified AHP is adopted to determine the

indicator weights with the basic steps as follows

(1) Establish a comparative judgment matrix The comparative judgment

matrix is obtained through comparing contributed proportion of multiple

indicators to the overall target by the judgment scale wherein the fuzzy

judgment number introduced is 1 3 5 7 and 9 and the reciprocal of

such number indicates the important degree of one element relatively to

another The results are shown in next table

Table 422 Comparison matrix of level I indicators

A1 A2 A3 A4

A1 1 15 13 3

A2 5 1 3 7

A3 3 13 1 5

A4 13 17 15 1

(2) Calculate the characteristic vector of the comparative judgment matrix

which refers to the weighted vector of the indicator The writer adopts

42

the geometric method to calculate the characteristic vector The

calculated result is as follows

ω=(012 0560 026 006)T λmax=418 It can be obtained from the table

RI=09 Wherein ω is the characteristic vector corresponding to the

maximum characteristic value λmax of the comparative judgment matrix

namely the weighted vector of the indicator RI is the average

consistency indicator as shown in following table

Table423 Average random consistency indicator RI

Matrix Order

RI

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

0 0 058 09 112 124 132 141

Matrix Order

RI

9 10 11 12 13 14 15

145 149 152 154 156 158 159

(3) Conduct consistency check on the comparative judgment matrix Adopt

the random consistency proportion CR to judge the consistency of the

comparative judgment matrix According to CI= (λmax -n)(n-1) and

CR=CIRI it can be obtained through calculation CR=007lt01 Thus

this comparative judgment matrix has a satisfactory consistency and the

indicator weight coefficient calculated through this matrix is acceptable

43

II Determination of level II indicator weights

The data at this level are the details of level Ⅰ indicator The judgment

matrix obtained through comparing multiple sub-indicators under Level Ⅰ

indicators is adopted to determine the weights of sub-indicators under each

indicator one by one The specific steps are as follows

(1) The experts score the weights within the given range To determine the

weights of several small indicators under the same big indicator it is

supposed that the score of small indicator ｋ under the indicator j made

by the expert i is Xijk wherein i=12n n is the total number of

experts ј=12m m is the total number of LevelⅡ indicator к

=12Oj Oj is the number of small indicators under the big indicator ј

іјк IJK LRC l I j k

(2) The credit rating of the expert і is l l =1 2 3 l =1 indicates this expert

is quite familiar with the evaluated contents l =2 indicator this expert is

44

with the evaluated contents l =3 indicates this expert is not quite familiar

with the evaluated contents yi1 is the=08 yi2 =05 and yi3=1

(3) The comprehensive evaluation score of small indicator l under the

indicator j is as follows

(4) The formula for normalization processing of indicator weights is as

follows and the absolute weight of the indicator set is marked as

q=(q1q2q11)

(5) Because of the same justification and principle we donrsquot give the detail

about the calculation The same with the level Ⅰ calculation we

manipulation data one by one and get 14 results And obtain the average

45

results by weighted average method The results detail as Table for the

final weights of Level-Ⅱ evaluation indicators

Above the calculation process and method are just one of data from the

questionable surveys In this study the final results are got from the

weighted average by the results of each questionable survey

The final results are shown as Table424

Table424 Indicator weights table of indicator system

Level I

indicators Weight LevelⅡ indicators

Relative

weight

Absolute

weight

Importance

percentage

Port Facilities

A1 02735

e-RTGC U11 05506 01506 1506

AMP U12 01648 00451 451

AGV U13 02826 00773 773

Port Rates and

Charges A2

02902

Green ship certification s

ystem U21 04724 01371 1371

Incentives on the new

clean technology U22 02871 00833 833

Green Flag (speed

reduction incentive)U23 02405 00698 698

Inland

connection A3

02865

Eco-friendly means of

transport U31 05942 01702 1702

Joint distribution U32 04058 01163 1163

Social

environmentA4 00863

Cost on amount of CO2

emission U41 03698 00319 319

CO2 emissions reduction

policies U42 02273 00196 196

Beautiful environment

construction in inner

harbors U43

04029 00348 348

46

III Case study

In the questionable survey we also got the mark of Green Port measures

evaluation value of many main ports such as Singapore Port Shanghai Port

Hongkong Port Busan Port LALB Port Rotterdam Port and Yocohama Port

The highest mark is 5 and lowest one is 1

Table425 Evaluation value of many main ports

Singapore

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

LALB

Port

Rotterdam

Port

Yocohama

Port

Port facilities 38000 36000 34000 38182 38000 42000 32000

Port rates and

charges 32000 36000 31000 35455 32000 39000 33000

Inland

connection 39000 34545 35000 29091 35000 45000 36000

Social

circumstance 42000 32727 41000 32000 38000 42727 36000

With the Green Port and Port competitiveness indicator weights results these

ports got the final evaluation value

47

Table426 Final evaluation value on main ports Green Port measures and

competitiveness

Rotterdam

Port

Singapore

Port

LALB

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

Yocohama

Port

394 345 330 330 319 318 317

43 Results Analysis

From the results table we can obtain the many results as following

① The main Green Port measures which are more important to improve port

competitiveness are Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system the indicator weights are 01702 01506 and

01371 among the 11 indicators

② In the Green Port construction Cost on amount of CO2 emission and CO2

emissions reduction policies are the restrictions indicators but the weight

of two indicators are not big 00319 and 00196 So effect on Green Port

construction to port competitiveness does have the weaken capacity but

not clearly strengthen more clearly Thus Green Port construction really

could improve the port competitiveness

48

③ In the case study traditional ports Rotterdam and Singapore Port give us

better examples on Green Port construction especially Rotterdam Port

④ Hongkong Busan and Yocohama Port all got a lower evaluation value

But in detail Hongkong and Yocohama Port got a lower on the port

facilities and rates and charges Busan Port got a higher on the port

facilities and rates and charges but a lower on the inland connection and

social circumstance

⑤ Shanghai Port doesnrsquot have Particular strength factors but the

comprehensive strength is not bad the same as LALB Port

49

Chapter 5 Conclusion

In this thesis the effects of Green Port construction for improving the port

competitiveness have been studied Under the definition of Green Port the

characteristics of Green Port and its effects has been shown by analysing the AHP

method which based on the questionary survey for Green Port specialists and port

officers

Follow the results of analysis on Green Port competitiveness AHP model

Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green ship certification system is

better for Green Port Construction welcome for shipping companies and citizens

who live around the port And in the analysis of Port competitiveness factors port

rates and charges always affects port competitiveness a lot As a trend inland

connection factor abstracts more attention of shipping companies

50

On the trend of port department each port should take a activity to adjust

strategy for improving its competitiveness Such as in the main ports evaluation

Busan port get a high value on port rates and charges and port facilities but as a

lower value on inland connection factor the final value is not as well as we look

forward In the evaluation of Singapore Port through it gets a lower value on rates

and charges higher value on inland connection and social circumstance causes the

final value are better So the Green Port Construction may be a trend in port

department

In the results of this thesis Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system are better solutions for Green Port Construction And

especially it can be verified that the port rates and charges always affects port

competitiveness Futhermore the investment for Green Port construction and its

effects have to be verified in the future

51

References

1 Hoyle B S and Smith J 1992 Transport and Development In Modern

transport geography edited by B S Hoyle R D Knowles (London Belhaven

Press)pp11-31

2 Beresford A K C De Souza A J R G and Pettit S J 2005 Stategic

development of liner shipping companies and terminal operators Ocean yearbook

19(Chicago 1L The University of Chicago Press) pp 732-750

3 Heaver T D 2002 Supply chain and logistics management implications for

liner shipping In The handbook of maritime economics and business edited by C

Grammenos (LondonLLP) pp 375-396

4 Park T E (2011) A Study on selection criteria of Green Port and evaluation of

major Korean port A masters thesis of graduate school of Incheon university

52

5 JeongBH (2009)Green port management policy directions in the green

growth era- The case of Gwangyang port in Republic of Korea Journal of Korea

Port Economic Association Vol25(3) p361-384

6 Lee J S Han N H(2009) A study on Green Port Revitalization According to

Air Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

7 Lee Y K Nan J W(2010)Green Logistics Policy Analysis and Implications

of Japan

8 Lee B S (2010)Tendency and Countermeasures on Green Logistics in Port

Logistics Company A masters thesis of graduate school of Korean Maritime

university

9 Lee J S (2009) A Study on Green Port Revitalization According to Air

Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

10 Zhang F Y Li Z Lu X J Yao X L(2008)Competitiveness of Inland

Ports Based on F-AHP

11 Port of Long Beach (2009) Green Port Policy wwwpolbcom

12 The port of Los Angeles wwwportoflosangelesorg

21

ltTable 233gt Summary of the Main Port of Green Port Measures

COUNTRY PORT MEASURES

US

LALB Port

Green flag AMP discharge gas reduction obligation

recommends use of alternative fuels and clean fuel

funding for the development of alternative fuels facilities

by new engine development instead of NOx emissions

green truck program (reduce70-80) low-sulfur fuel

utilization restore and revitalize the Los Cerritos

Wetlands

New York

Port

AMP modernized facilities utilization high speed hybrid

yard

Auckland

Port

Incentives on the new cleaning technology containers

transportation system

Seattle Port

AMP green ship membership Tier 4 level reducing PM

by 1994 level Smart Way program Northwest Ports

Clean Air Strategy

EU Rotterdam

Port

Clean engine (barge) green ship membership carbon

footprint calculation cruise ship which under port

authority change to use low-sulfur fuel low emission

engine development and utilization Green Award AMP

ship recycling incentives

Japan

Tokyo Port

RTGC (Rubber Tired Gantry Crane) apply for the barge

between Tokyo and Yocohama shorten international

maritime container cargo transportation land distance

super eco-shipbuilding technology dissemination and

promotion green business certification operation

shippers and logistics companies support cooperation

Osaka Port AMP electrical power equipment solar power equipment

Hakata Port E-RTGC solar power utilization in refrigerated container

Korea Busan Port

LNG truck E-RTGC eco-friendly transport means

conversion (rail canal barge) GHG emission reduction

obligation

22

24 Green Port Indicators Research

As the previous section list shown Green Port measures and programs are

substantially the same

When a ship entry in the port boundary from voyage many ports give a

incentive on shifting and utilizing sulfur-low fuel and reducing the speed under

20 miles when the ship berth in the port the alternative maritime power are

provided which replace its power generation

Next in the cargo unloading and loading department the same with above

utilization of sulfur-low fuel and electrical equipment are promoted and

eco-driving education to driver is necessary what speed is fuel fully burning and

emission minimum point

In the cargo transport department in other words truck department the

replacement on aging trucks is popular in many ports aging trucks are prohibited

close to port at the same time an incentive or support function are provided on

aging replacement The automated equipments are recommended to utilize in the

Green Port like hybrid yard tractor And a perfect plan on truck running also could

reduce the idling time and against the emission of CO2

The details reference the following Table 241

23

Table241 Green Port measures in port each department

Emission reduction programs

Ship

department

Shipping

in the

port

boundary

Obligation on the utilization of sulfur-low fuel

Reform ship engine and utilize hybrid

Speed reduce in the port entrance(a off-shore fee

incentive)

Off-shore AMP

Shift utilization system of clean fuel

Unloading and loading

department

Obligation on the utilization of sulfur-low fuel

Replace electrical equipment

Eco-driving

Truck department Hybrid yard tractor utilization

Promote aging truck replacement

Minimum the idling time

Others LED light in the Port

Develop renew and recycle resource energy

The Green Port measures in this study are e-RTGC AMP AGV Green Ship

certification system incentives on the new clean technology Green Flag(speed

reduction incentive)eco-friendly transport means conversion joint distribution

the cost on account of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction polities and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

The details and definition on each Green Port measure and the relationship with

Port Competitiveness will be expressed in next chapter

24

Chapter 3 The Relationship between Port

Competitiveness and Green Port Construction

31 Port Competitiveness Literature Review

Although past studies on port selection models have focused on port selection

made by port facilities port services port rates and charge and location

Murphy made a survey between 534 shipping companies and port authorities in

1989 and between 1850 shipping companies and port authorities in 1992

Comparing with other papers Murphys got a survey among more widely

objects In his paper port selection(port competitiveness) was seen to affected by

facilities situation appropriate pilotage max ship entrance probability the

25

capability of handling non-regular cargos whether to provide information of ship

nationality or not and port services level

In French model (1979) there are two factors affecting the port selection (port

competitiveness) endogenous factor and exogenous factor In endogenous factors

there are adequacy and physical plant condition of terminal facilities terminal rate

and charges frequency and geographic coverage of ship and freight services the

capacity of connecting to inland rails or transport net and the services provides for

the shipping or logistics And exogenous factors included the size and economic

capacity of hinterland as a source exports or market for imports national

economic situation trade policy and support established by government the

situation at home and abroad

The same as Frenchs paper in Paters paper in 1990 there are endogenous and

exogenous factors too In endogenous there are the services provides for the

shipping or logistics capacity of terminal facilities situation and condition of

facilities operation strategies established by port authority convenience to utilize

And the political situation at home and abroad social change economic factor

stabilized labor and capital However in 2004 there is a tremendous change in

Peters new paper There are four parts multi-modal process interface transport

modes infrastructure Multi-model Process part includes ship entrance rapid

speed and accuracy shipper and shipping companies reactive operation flexibility

Interface includes labor power information technology and so on And there are

26

ship calls frequency and amount of fleet factors in the transport modes part In the

infrastructure part includes port facility equipments and so on

Port facilities rates and charges services inland situation and social

circumstance factors affect the port selection and competitiveness a lot from the

research until 1992 by Murphy And in Lirn and Pater research 2003-2004 the

new and detail factors are shown to us

We can clearly see the contents in next table

27

Table 311 Prevention literature research results

Influence factors

French

(1979)

Endogenous

port facilities port rate and charges calls frequency port services

port connection with inland

Exogenous

economic size of hinterland national economic situation trade

policy home and abroad situation

Willingale

(1982)

voyage distance economy size entrance to port and route port

facilities max ship entrance probability port operation rates and

charges port authority scale of port

Slack

(1985)

cost of inland transportation port proximity ship demurrage

multi-transport

Peter

(1990)

Endogenous

port facilities condition of facilities operation strategies

convenience to utilize

Exogenous

political situation social change economic factor stabilized labor

and capital

UNCTAD

(1992)

port facilities services location level of financial industry

information communication system social circumstances economic

stability

Murphy

(1992)

facilities situation appropriate pilotage max ship entrance

probability the capability of handling non-regular cargos whether to

provide information of ship nationality or not port services level

Lirn

(2003-2004)

physical and technologic facilities geopolitical location port

operation and management shipping and terminal cost

Peter

(2004)

Multi-modal Process

ship entrance rapid speed and accuracy shipper and shipping

companies reactive operation flexibility

Interface labor and capital

Transport modes ship calls frequency and amount of fleet factors

28

And there are many experts and scholars research for the influence factors to

port selection and competitiveness in Korea The specific content follows table5

Table 312 Literature research in Korean academia

Influence factors

Jeon Il-su (1992) location facilities charges service level (EDI) terminal operation

port authority

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

( 1993 )

location facilities throughput charges service operation

situation

Kim Hak-so

(1993)

export shipping amount of annual cost of each ton of cargo

marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km of

cargo loading time

import marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km

of cargo amount of liner ship

Yeo Gi-tae (1996) location facilities throughput charge service operation situation

Ha Dong-u amp

Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

location facilities service level logistics charges environment of

logistics service

Yeo Gi-tae (1999) location facilities throughput charges service

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

throughput quay length yard area GNP

Kum Jong-su

(2001)

distance between port and cargo site terminal facilities service

the capacity of multi-transport capacity of cargo handling

administrative service rates and charges of inland transport

congestion

Yeo Gi-tae (2002) location throughput facilities service level

Kim Jin-gu (2002) port facilities location cargo amount rates and charges services

29

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005)

voyage degree to attract cargo cargo handling cost amount of

handling cargo connection to inland service reliability location

berth availability quay length feeder network depth

transshipment volumes cargo security profitability

offing degree to attract cargo berth availability cargo handling

cost transshipment volumes

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005)

cargo handling amount port facilities location rates and charges

level of service

Heo Yun-su

(2005)

port facilities rates and charges services marketing geopolitics

location economic and social circumstance

Kim Geun-seop

(2007)

port services facilities cargo handling amount location cost

productivity factor global factor

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) rates and charges services port characteristics

Many experts and scholars make a research on port selection and

competitiveness recently But the factors selection criteria are difference

Nevertheless the main factors are facilities services cost and so on

Therefore port competitiveness factors which chose in this study are port

facilities port services port rates and charges and social circumstance

However the main factors are not the whole factors any more more and more

detail factors and characteristic factors appearance Port selection and

competitiveness factors have changed And the development content is introduced

in next part

30

32 Port Competitiveness Development Tree

As mentioned above port facilities port rates and charges and port location are

the basic factors in the port selection and competitiveness

From the following table we can discover that first one facilities rates and

charges and location are the most important factor in port selection and

competitiveness second one the importance of social circumstance turns larger

inland connection is necessary all the time

Table 321 Main factor in the Pretentious Research

31

port facilities rates and

charges

inland

connection

social

circumstance location

French (1979) radic radic radic

Wiliingale (1982) radic radic

Slack (1985) radic

Pater (1990) radic radic

UNCTAD (1992) radic radic radic

Murphy(1992) radic

Jeon Il-su (1992) radic radic radic

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

(1993)

radic radic radic

Kim Hak-so

(1993) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1996) radic radic radic

Ha Dong-u

amp Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1998) radic radic radic

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

radic

Kum Jong-su

(2001) radic radic radic radic

Kim Jin-gu(2002) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(2002) radic radic

Lirn(2003-2004) radic radic radic

Pater(2004) radic

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005) radic radic radic

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005) radic radic radic

Heo Yun-su

(2005) radic radic radic radic

Kim Geun-seop

(2007) radic radic radic radic

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) radic

32

33 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green

Port Construction

Following the research above Port facilities rates and charges inland

connection and social circumstance are chose in this study port selection and

competitiveness department

e-RTGC Electric rubber tired gantry crane is a mobile gantry crane used for

stacking intermodal containers within the stacking areas of a container terminal

e-RTGC are used at container terminals and container storage yards to straddling

multiple lanes of railroad and container storage or when maximum storage

density in the container stack is desired

AMP is shorted for Alternative Marine Power and Itrsquos a facility which

provides the electric system in the land for ship which entry in the port The

facility can reduce emissions which ship get entrance in the port

AGV is a mobile robot that follows markers or wires in the floor or uses

vision or lasers They are most often used in industrial applications to move

materials around a manufacturing facility or a warehouse Automatic Guided

Vehicle systems work around-the-clock making continuous flow and just-in-time

delivery easier to achieve Application of the automatic guided vehicle has broade

33

ned during the late 20th century and they are no longer restricted to industrial

environments

The e-RTGC AMP and AGV are the new clean facilities and equipments in the

Green Port they donrsquot reduce the efficiency of handling cargo and they also

reduce the CO2 emission account

Green ship certification system if a ship utilizes clean and CO2 emission

reduction technology on the ship building adds equipment and management and

son on certification would be received And the port authority gives some

incentive and preferential treatment among 45 ports Such as a better schedule is

provided for green membership ship priority in handing cargo and discount on

entrance fee

Incentives on the new cleaning technology There are two expressions about

this measure one is that the port authority give a incentive to ship which have a

great utilization on the new cleaning technology and the other one is that

environment provide many incentives to the authority which utilize the new

cleaning technology in the port such as LED street lamp solar power cranes

Green flag The Green Flag incentive program was set up to encourage ships to

slow down in order to improve air quality The Green Flag program provides

approximately $2 million a year in discounts for vessel operators who slow their

ships to 12 knots (22kmh) or less within 20miles (32km) of the harbor

34

According to the Port the Green Flag program reduced air pollution by 600tons in

2007 and is expected to do better in 2008

All of Green ship certification system incentives on the new cleaning

technology and Green Flag are incentives provided for users of port and aimed at

reduce port rates and charges So the 3 measures belong to affect port rates and

charges

Eco-friendly transport means conversion Eco-friendly means of transport are

much accounted of green port for example railway discharge less GHG emission

than truck barge with a clean engine among the river and inshore canal

Joint distribution joint distribution is a collaborative system which port

provides among many logistics companies It can make the cargo handling speed

rapidly and reduce cargo storage time for CO2 emission reducing such as

refrigerated container In an addition it also makes the logistics companies

transport more efficient

Cost on amount of CO2 emission differenced from other port the cost on

amount of CO2 is included in the port cost The cost aims to reduce the CO2

emission directly

CO2 emission reduction policies compared with other traditional port Green

Port gives more cost discount and incentives but in an addition there are many

policies on CO2 emission restriction Such as aging trucks restrictions in inland

transport department ship entry speed reduced and fuel changed in the ship

35

department and so on Whether these restriction policies constrain port

development or not and the degree of these policies constrain port development

will be explain by the AHP results

Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors some ports in the

western countries are opened as a travel place for visitors so as to change the

polluted impress and raise the position in our heart

Cost on amount of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction policies and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors can affect the social

circumstance factor Whether these measures can or not improve the social

circumstance and port competitiveness we have to see the next calculation and

results

36

Chapter 4 The Green Port Competitiveness

Analysis

41 The Green Port Competitiveness Model by AHP

The AHP is one multi-criteria decision making method which has been

extensively applied to a variety of decision-making situations The multi-criteria

techniques are considered to be a promising framework for evaluation of

decision-making factors since they have the potential to take into account

conflicting multidimensional incommensurable and uncertain effects of

decisions explicitly

In order to apply the AHP method a hierarchical decision schema was

constructed by decomposing the decision problem into its decision elements

37

After that the importance or preferences of the decision elements are examined in

a pair-wise comparison to the elements in the hierarchy The parameters are

estimated using pair-wise comparisons between the importance of the attribute or

decision element in the function using data made by each responder Making

comparisons is a question of which of the two attributes is more import as well as

how much more important

Follow these theories the Green Port Competitiveness Model choose factors as

follow in port competitiveness factors part there are port facilities port rates and

charges inland connection social circumstance in Green Port construction part

there are e-RTGC AMP AGV green ship certification system green flag

incentives on the new cleaning technology eco-friendly transport means

conversion joint distribution CO2 emission reduction policies cost on amount of

CO2 emission beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

38

Figure 41 Green Port Competitiveness AHP model

Follow the Green Port Competitiveness AHP as shown we set a questionnaire

survey to many experts scholars working in logistics system area And we got 15

ones and 14 ones results are believable and integrated

42 Green Port Competitiveness Analysis

39

The key to construction of the factors which affects the port competitiveness

is to determine the conceptual model The selection of the factors directly affects

the evaluation of the result In order to ensure the accuracy objectivity and

practicality of evaluation results the following basic principles must be followed

when selecting factors systematic principles the principle of universal

comparability practical principle and goal-oriented principle In view of the

foregoing the competitiveness which affected by Green Port construction model

is made The analysis follows established principles of port competitiveness

evaluation taking into account the characteristics and functions of the port as well

as port facilities port services port rates and charges ship entrance inland

connection social circumstances and so on

(1) Port facilities

e-RTGC U11 AMP U12 AGV U13

(2) Port rates and charges

Green ship certification system U21 Incentives on the new clean

technology U22 Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

(3) Inland connection

Eco-friendly means of transport U31 Joint distribution U32

(4) Social circumstances

40

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41 CO2 emission reduction policies

U42 Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors U43

Table 421 Details of Level I and Level II values

Level I

indicators Symbol Level II indicators Symbol

Port facilities A1

e-RTGC U11

AMP U12

AGV U13

Port rates and

charges A2

Green ship certification system U21

Incentives on the new clean technology U22

Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

Inland

connection A3

Eco-friendly means of transport U31

Joint distribution U32

Social

circumstances A4

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41

CO2 emissions reduction policies U42

Beautiful environment construction in inner

harbors U43

41

I Determination of level I indicator weights

As the ports competitiveness evaluation indicators at this level are complex

and the elements are not easily quantified AHP is adopted to determine the

indicator weights with the basic steps as follows

(1) Establish a comparative judgment matrix The comparative judgment

matrix is obtained through comparing contributed proportion of multiple

indicators to the overall target by the judgment scale wherein the fuzzy

judgment number introduced is 1 3 5 7 and 9 and the reciprocal of

such number indicates the important degree of one element relatively to

another The results are shown in next table

Table 422 Comparison matrix of level I indicators

A1 A2 A3 A4

A1 1 15 13 3

A2 5 1 3 7

A3 3 13 1 5

A4 13 17 15 1

(2) Calculate the characteristic vector of the comparative judgment matrix

which refers to the weighted vector of the indicator The writer adopts

42

the geometric method to calculate the characteristic vector The

calculated result is as follows

ω=(012 0560 026 006)T λmax=418 It can be obtained from the table

RI=09 Wherein ω is the characteristic vector corresponding to the

maximum characteristic value λmax of the comparative judgment matrix

namely the weighted vector of the indicator RI is the average

consistency indicator as shown in following table

Table423 Average random consistency indicator RI

Matrix Order

RI

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

0 0 058 09 112 124 132 141

Matrix Order

RI

9 10 11 12 13 14 15

145 149 152 154 156 158 159

(3) Conduct consistency check on the comparative judgment matrix Adopt

the random consistency proportion CR to judge the consistency of the

comparative judgment matrix According to CI= (λmax -n)(n-1) and

CR=CIRI it can be obtained through calculation CR=007lt01 Thus

this comparative judgment matrix has a satisfactory consistency and the

indicator weight coefficient calculated through this matrix is acceptable

43

II Determination of level II indicator weights

The data at this level are the details of level Ⅰ indicator The judgment

matrix obtained through comparing multiple sub-indicators under Level Ⅰ

indicators is adopted to determine the weights of sub-indicators under each

indicator one by one The specific steps are as follows

(1) The experts score the weights within the given range To determine the

weights of several small indicators under the same big indicator it is

supposed that the score of small indicator ｋ under the indicator j made

by the expert i is Xijk wherein i=12n n is the total number of

experts ј=12m m is the total number of LevelⅡ indicator к

=12Oj Oj is the number of small indicators under the big indicator ј

іјк IJK LRC l I j k

(2) The credit rating of the expert і is l l =1 2 3 l =1 indicates this expert

is quite familiar with the evaluated contents l =2 indicator this expert is

44

with the evaluated contents l =3 indicates this expert is not quite familiar

with the evaluated contents yi1 is the=08 yi2 =05 and yi3=1

(3) The comprehensive evaluation score of small indicator l under the

indicator j is as follows

(4) The formula for normalization processing of indicator weights is as

follows and the absolute weight of the indicator set is marked as

q=(q1q2q11)

(5) Because of the same justification and principle we donrsquot give the detail

about the calculation The same with the level Ⅰ calculation we

manipulation data one by one and get 14 results And obtain the average

45

results by weighted average method The results detail as Table for the

final weights of Level-Ⅱ evaluation indicators

Above the calculation process and method are just one of data from the

questionable surveys In this study the final results are got from the

weighted average by the results of each questionable survey

The final results are shown as Table424

Table424 Indicator weights table of indicator system

Level I

indicators Weight LevelⅡ indicators

Relative

weight

Absolute

weight

Importance

percentage

Port Facilities

A1 02735

e-RTGC U11 05506 01506 1506

AMP U12 01648 00451 451

AGV U13 02826 00773 773

Port Rates and

Charges A2

02902

Green ship certification s

ystem U21 04724 01371 1371

Incentives on the new

clean technology U22 02871 00833 833

Green Flag (speed

reduction incentive)U23 02405 00698 698

Inland

connection A3

02865

Eco-friendly means of

transport U31 05942 01702 1702

Joint distribution U32 04058 01163 1163

Social

environmentA4 00863

Cost on amount of CO2

emission U41 03698 00319 319

CO2 emissions reduction

policies U42 02273 00196 196

Beautiful environment

construction in inner

harbors U43

04029 00348 348

46

III Case study

In the questionable survey we also got the mark of Green Port measures

evaluation value of many main ports such as Singapore Port Shanghai Port

Hongkong Port Busan Port LALB Port Rotterdam Port and Yocohama Port

The highest mark is 5 and lowest one is 1

Table425 Evaluation value of many main ports

Singapore

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

LALB

Port

Rotterdam

Port

Yocohama

Port

Port facilities 38000 36000 34000 38182 38000 42000 32000

Port rates and

charges 32000 36000 31000 35455 32000 39000 33000

Inland

connection 39000 34545 35000 29091 35000 45000 36000

Social

circumstance 42000 32727 41000 32000 38000 42727 36000

With the Green Port and Port competitiveness indicator weights results these

ports got the final evaluation value

47

Table426 Final evaluation value on main ports Green Port measures and

competitiveness

Rotterdam

Port

Singapore

Port

LALB

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

Yocohama

Port

394 345 330 330 319 318 317

43 Results Analysis

From the results table we can obtain the many results as following

① The main Green Port measures which are more important to improve port

competitiveness are Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system the indicator weights are 01702 01506 and

01371 among the 11 indicators

② In the Green Port construction Cost on amount of CO2 emission and CO2

emissions reduction policies are the restrictions indicators but the weight

of two indicators are not big 00319 and 00196 So effect on Green Port

construction to port competitiveness does have the weaken capacity but

not clearly strengthen more clearly Thus Green Port construction really

could improve the port competitiveness

48

③ In the case study traditional ports Rotterdam and Singapore Port give us

better examples on Green Port construction especially Rotterdam Port

④ Hongkong Busan and Yocohama Port all got a lower evaluation value

But in detail Hongkong and Yocohama Port got a lower on the port

facilities and rates and charges Busan Port got a higher on the port

facilities and rates and charges but a lower on the inland connection and

social circumstance

⑤ Shanghai Port doesnrsquot have Particular strength factors but the

comprehensive strength is not bad the same as LALB Port

49

Chapter 5 Conclusion

In this thesis the effects of Green Port construction for improving the port

competitiveness have been studied Under the definition of Green Port the

characteristics of Green Port and its effects has been shown by analysing the AHP

method which based on the questionary survey for Green Port specialists and port

officers

Follow the results of analysis on Green Port competitiveness AHP model

Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green ship certification system is

better for Green Port Construction welcome for shipping companies and citizens

who live around the port And in the analysis of Port competitiveness factors port

rates and charges always affects port competitiveness a lot As a trend inland

connection factor abstracts more attention of shipping companies

50

On the trend of port department each port should take a activity to adjust

strategy for improving its competitiveness Such as in the main ports evaluation

Busan port get a high value on port rates and charges and port facilities but as a

lower value on inland connection factor the final value is not as well as we look

forward In the evaluation of Singapore Port through it gets a lower value on rates

and charges higher value on inland connection and social circumstance causes the

final value are better So the Green Port Construction may be a trend in port

department

In the results of this thesis Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system are better solutions for Green Port Construction And

especially it can be verified that the port rates and charges always affects port

competitiveness Futhermore the investment for Green Port construction and its

effects have to be verified in the future

51

References

1 Hoyle B S and Smith J 1992 Transport and Development In Modern

transport geography edited by B S Hoyle R D Knowles (London Belhaven

Press)pp11-31

2 Beresford A K C De Souza A J R G and Pettit S J 2005 Stategic

development of liner shipping companies and terminal operators Ocean yearbook

19(Chicago 1L The University of Chicago Press) pp 732-750

3 Heaver T D 2002 Supply chain and logistics management implications for

liner shipping In The handbook of maritime economics and business edited by C

Grammenos (LondonLLP) pp 375-396

4 Park T E (2011) A Study on selection criteria of Green Port and evaluation of

major Korean port A masters thesis of graduate school of Incheon university

52

5 JeongBH (2009)Green port management policy directions in the green

growth era- The case of Gwangyang port in Republic of Korea Journal of Korea

Port Economic Association Vol25(3) p361-384

6 Lee J S Han N H(2009) A study on Green Port Revitalization According to

Air Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

7 Lee Y K Nan J W(2010)Green Logistics Policy Analysis and Implications

of Japan

8 Lee B S (2010)Tendency and Countermeasures on Green Logistics in Port

Logistics Company A masters thesis of graduate school of Korean Maritime

university

9 Lee J S (2009) A Study on Green Port Revitalization According to Air

Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

10 Zhang F Y Li Z Lu X J Yao X L(2008)Competitiveness of Inland

Ports Based on F-AHP

11 Port of Long Beach (2009) Green Port Policy wwwpolbcom

12 The port of Los Angeles wwwportoflosangelesorg

22

24 Green Port Indicators Research

As the previous section list shown Green Port measures and programs are

substantially the same

When a ship entry in the port boundary from voyage many ports give a

incentive on shifting and utilizing sulfur-low fuel and reducing the speed under

20 miles when the ship berth in the port the alternative maritime power are

provided which replace its power generation

Next in the cargo unloading and loading department the same with above

utilization of sulfur-low fuel and electrical equipment are promoted and

eco-driving education to driver is necessary what speed is fuel fully burning and

emission minimum point

In the cargo transport department in other words truck department the

replacement on aging trucks is popular in many ports aging trucks are prohibited

close to port at the same time an incentive or support function are provided on

aging replacement The automated equipments are recommended to utilize in the

Green Port like hybrid yard tractor And a perfect plan on truck running also could

reduce the idling time and against the emission of CO2

The details reference the following Table 241

23

Table241 Green Port measures in port each department

Emission reduction programs

Ship

department

Shipping

in the

port

boundary

Obligation on the utilization of sulfur-low fuel

Reform ship engine and utilize hybrid

Speed reduce in the port entrance(a off-shore fee

incentive)

Off-shore AMP

Shift utilization system of clean fuel

Unloading and loading

department

Obligation on the utilization of sulfur-low fuel

Replace electrical equipment

Eco-driving

Truck department Hybrid yard tractor utilization

Promote aging truck replacement

Minimum the idling time

Others LED light in the Port

Develop renew and recycle resource energy

The Green Port measures in this study are e-RTGC AMP AGV Green Ship

certification system incentives on the new clean technology Green Flag(speed

reduction incentive)eco-friendly transport means conversion joint distribution

the cost on account of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction polities and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

The details and definition on each Green Port measure and the relationship with

Port Competitiveness will be expressed in next chapter

24

Chapter 3 The Relationship between Port

Competitiveness and Green Port Construction

31 Port Competitiveness Literature Review

Although past studies on port selection models have focused on port selection

made by port facilities port services port rates and charge and location

Murphy made a survey between 534 shipping companies and port authorities in

1989 and between 1850 shipping companies and port authorities in 1992

Comparing with other papers Murphys got a survey among more widely

objects In his paper port selection(port competitiveness) was seen to affected by

facilities situation appropriate pilotage max ship entrance probability the

25

capability of handling non-regular cargos whether to provide information of ship

nationality or not and port services level

In French model (1979) there are two factors affecting the port selection (port

competitiveness) endogenous factor and exogenous factor In endogenous factors

there are adequacy and physical plant condition of terminal facilities terminal rate

and charges frequency and geographic coverage of ship and freight services the

capacity of connecting to inland rails or transport net and the services provides for

the shipping or logistics And exogenous factors included the size and economic

capacity of hinterland as a source exports or market for imports national

economic situation trade policy and support established by government the

situation at home and abroad

The same as Frenchs paper in Paters paper in 1990 there are endogenous and

exogenous factors too In endogenous there are the services provides for the

shipping or logistics capacity of terminal facilities situation and condition of

facilities operation strategies established by port authority convenience to utilize

And the political situation at home and abroad social change economic factor

stabilized labor and capital However in 2004 there is a tremendous change in

Peters new paper There are four parts multi-modal process interface transport

modes infrastructure Multi-model Process part includes ship entrance rapid

speed and accuracy shipper and shipping companies reactive operation flexibility

Interface includes labor power information technology and so on And there are

26

ship calls frequency and amount of fleet factors in the transport modes part In the

infrastructure part includes port facility equipments and so on

Port facilities rates and charges services inland situation and social

circumstance factors affect the port selection and competitiveness a lot from the

research until 1992 by Murphy And in Lirn and Pater research 2003-2004 the

new and detail factors are shown to us

We can clearly see the contents in next table

27

Table 311 Prevention literature research results

Influence factors

French

(1979)

Endogenous

port facilities port rate and charges calls frequency port services

port connection with inland

Exogenous

economic size of hinterland national economic situation trade

policy home and abroad situation

Willingale

(1982)

voyage distance economy size entrance to port and route port

facilities max ship entrance probability port operation rates and

charges port authority scale of port

Slack

(1985)

cost of inland transportation port proximity ship demurrage

multi-transport

Peter

(1990)

Endogenous

port facilities condition of facilities operation strategies

convenience to utilize

Exogenous

political situation social change economic factor stabilized labor

and capital

UNCTAD

(1992)

port facilities services location level of financial industry

information communication system social circumstances economic

stability

Murphy

(1992)

facilities situation appropriate pilotage max ship entrance

probability the capability of handling non-regular cargos whether to

provide information of ship nationality or not port services level

Lirn

(2003-2004)

physical and technologic facilities geopolitical location port

operation and management shipping and terminal cost

Peter

(2004)

Multi-modal Process

ship entrance rapid speed and accuracy shipper and shipping

companies reactive operation flexibility

Interface labor and capital

Transport modes ship calls frequency and amount of fleet factors

28

And there are many experts and scholars research for the influence factors to

port selection and competitiveness in Korea The specific content follows table5

Table 312 Literature research in Korean academia

Influence factors

Jeon Il-su (1992) location facilities charges service level (EDI) terminal operation

port authority

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

( 1993 )

location facilities throughput charges service operation

situation

Kim Hak-so

(1993)

export shipping amount of annual cost of each ton of cargo

marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km of

cargo loading time

import marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km

of cargo amount of liner ship

Yeo Gi-tae (1996) location facilities throughput charge service operation situation

Ha Dong-u amp

Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

location facilities service level logistics charges environment of

logistics service

Yeo Gi-tae (1999) location facilities throughput charges service

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

throughput quay length yard area GNP

Kum Jong-su

(2001)

distance between port and cargo site terminal facilities service

the capacity of multi-transport capacity of cargo handling

administrative service rates and charges of inland transport

congestion

Yeo Gi-tae (2002) location throughput facilities service level

Kim Jin-gu (2002) port facilities location cargo amount rates and charges services

29

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005)

voyage degree to attract cargo cargo handling cost amount of

handling cargo connection to inland service reliability location

berth availability quay length feeder network depth

transshipment volumes cargo security profitability

offing degree to attract cargo berth availability cargo handling

cost transshipment volumes

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005)

cargo handling amount port facilities location rates and charges

level of service

Heo Yun-su

(2005)

port facilities rates and charges services marketing geopolitics

location economic and social circumstance

Kim Geun-seop

(2007)

port services facilities cargo handling amount location cost

productivity factor global factor

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) rates and charges services port characteristics

Many experts and scholars make a research on port selection and

competitiveness recently But the factors selection criteria are difference

Nevertheless the main factors are facilities services cost and so on

Therefore port competitiveness factors which chose in this study are port

facilities port services port rates and charges and social circumstance

However the main factors are not the whole factors any more more and more

detail factors and characteristic factors appearance Port selection and

competitiveness factors have changed And the development content is introduced

in next part

30

32 Port Competitiveness Development Tree

As mentioned above port facilities port rates and charges and port location are

the basic factors in the port selection and competitiveness

From the following table we can discover that first one facilities rates and

charges and location are the most important factor in port selection and

competitiveness second one the importance of social circumstance turns larger

inland connection is necessary all the time

Table 321 Main factor in the Pretentious Research

31

port facilities rates and

charges

inland

connection

social

circumstance location

French (1979) radic radic radic

Wiliingale (1982) radic radic

Slack (1985) radic

Pater (1990) radic radic

UNCTAD (1992) radic radic radic

Murphy(1992) radic

Jeon Il-su (1992) radic radic radic

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

(1993)

radic radic radic

Kim Hak-so

(1993) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1996) radic radic radic

Ha Dong-u

amp Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1998) radic radic radic

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

radic

Kum Jong-su

(2001) radic radic radic radic

Kim Jin-gu(2002) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(2002) radic radic

Lirn(2003-2004) radic radic radic

Pater(2004) radic

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005) radic radic radic

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005) radic radic radic

Heo Yun-su

(2005) radic radic radic radic

Kim Geun-seop

(2007) radic radic radic radic

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) radic

32

33 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green

Port Construction

Following the research above Port facilities rates and charges inland

connection and social circumstance are chose in this study port selection and

competitiveness department

e-RTGC Electric rubber tired gantry crane is a mobile gantry crane used for

stacking intermodal containers within the stacking areas of a container terminal

e-RTGC are used at container terminals and container storage yards to straddling

multiple lanes of railroad and container storage or when maximum storage

density in the container stack is desired

AMP is shorted for Alternative Marine Power and Itrsquos a facility which

provides the electric system in the land for ship which entry in the port The

facility can reduce emissions which ship get entrance in the port

AGV is a mobile robot that follows markers or wires in the floor or uses

vision or lasers They are most often used in industrial applications to move

materials around a manufacturing facility or a warehouse Automatic Guided

Vehicle systems work around-the-clock making continuous flow and just-in-time

delivery easier to achieve Application of the automatic guided vehicle has broade

33

ned during the late 20th century and they are no longer restricted to industrial

environments

The e-RTGC AMP and AGV are the new clean facilities and equipments in the

Green Port they donrsquot reduce the efficiency of handling cargo and they also

reduce the CO2 emission account

Green ship certification system if a ship utilizes clean and CO2 emission

reduction technology on the ship building adds equipment and management and

son on certification would be received And the port authority gives some

incentive and preferential treatment among 45 ports Such as a better schedule is

provided for green membership ship priority in handing cargo and discount on

entrance fee

Incentives on the new cleaning technology There are two expressions about

this measure one is that the port authority give a incentive to ship which have a

great utilization on the new cleaning technology and the other one is that

environment provide many incentives to the authority which utilize the new

cleaning technology in the port such as LED street lamp solar power cranes

Green flag The Green Flag incentive program was set up to encourage ships to

slow down in order to improve air quality The Green Flag program provides

approximately $2 million a year in discounts for vessel operators who slow their

ships to 12 knots (22kmh) or less within 20miles (32km) of the harbor

34

According to the Port the Green Flag program reduced air pollution by 600tons in

2007 and is expected to do better in 2008

All of Green ship certification system incentives on the new cleaning

technology and Green Flag are incentives provided for users of port and aimed at

reduce port rates and charges So the 3 measures belong to affect port rates and

charges

Eco-friendly transport means conversion Eco-friendly means of transport are

much accounted of green port for example railway discharge less GHG emission

than truck barge with a clean engine among the river and inshore canal

Joint distribution joint distribution is a collaborative system which port

provides among many logistics companies It can make the cargo handling speed

rapidly and reduce cargo storage time for CO2 emission reducing such as

refrigerated container In an addition it also makes the logistics companies

transport more efficient

Cost on amount of CO2 emission differenced from other port the cost on

amount of CO2 is included in the port cost The cost aims to reduce the CO2

emission directly

CO2 emission reduction policies compared with other traditional port Green

Port gives more cost discount and incentives but in an addition there are many

policies on CO2 emission restriction Such as aging trucks restrictions in inland

transport department ship entry speed reduced and fuel changed in the ship

35

department and so on Whether these restriction policies constrain port

development or not and the degree of these policies constrain port development

will be explain by the AHP results

Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors some ports in the

western countries are opened as a travel place for visitors so as to change the

polluted impress and raise the position in our heart

Cost on amount of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction policies and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors can affect the social

circumstance factor Whether these measures can or not improve the social

circumstance and port competitiveness we have to see the next calculation and

results

36

Chapter 4 The Green Port Competitiveness

Analysis

41 The Green Port Competitiveness Model by AHP

The AHP is one multi-criteria decision making method which has been

extensively applied to a variety of decision-making situations The multi-criteria

techniques are considered to be a promising framework for evaluation of

decision-making factors since they have the potential to take into account

conflicting multidimensional incommensurable and uncertain effects of

decisions explicitly

In order to apply the AHP method a hierarchical decision schema was

constructed by decomposing the decision problem into its decision elements

37

After that the importance or preferences of the decision elements are examined in

a pair-wise comparison to the elements in the hierarchy The parameters are

estimated using pair-wise comparisons between the importance of the attribute or

decision element in the function using data made by each responder Making

comparisons is a question of which of the two attributes is more import as well as

how much more important

Follow these theories the Green Port Competitiveness Model choose factors as

follow in port competitiveness factors part there are port facilities port rates and

charges inland connection social circumstance in Green Port construction part

there are e-RTGC AMP AGV green ship certification system green flag

incentives on the new cleaning technology eco-friendly transport means

conversion joint distribution CO2 emission reduction policies cost on amount of

CO2 emission beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

38

Figure 41 Green Port Competitiveness AHP model

Follow the Green Port Competitiveness AHP as shown we set a questionnaire

survey to many experts scholars working in logistics system area And we got 15

ones and 14 ones results are believable and integrated

42 Green Port Competitiveness Analysis

39

The key to construction of the factors which affects the port competitiveness

is to determine the conceptual model The selection of the factors directly affects

the evaluation of the result In order to ensure the accuracy objectivity and

practicality of evaluation results the following basic principles must be followed

when selecting factors systematic principles the principle of universal

comparability practical principle and goal-oriented principle In view of the

foregoing the competitiveness which affected by Green Port construction model

is made The analysis follows established principles of port competitiveness

evaluation taking into account the characteristics and functions of the port as well

as port facilities port services port rates and charges ship entrance inland

connection social circumstances and so on

(1) Port facilities

e-RTGC U11 AMP U12 AGV U13

(2) Port rates and charges

Green ship certification system U21 Incentives on the new clean

technology U22 Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

(3) Inland connection

Eco-friendly means of transport U31 Joint distribution U32

(4) Social circumstances

40

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41 CO2 emission reduction policies

U42 Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors U43

Table 421 Details of Level I and Level II values

Level I

indicators Symbol Level II indicators Symbol

Port facilities A1

e-RTGC U11

AMP U12

AGV U13

Port rates and

charges A2

Green ship certification system U21

Incentives on the new clean technology U22

Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

Inland

connection A3

Eco-friendly means of transport U31

Joint distribution U32

Social

circumstances A4

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41

CO2 emissions reduction policies U42

Beautiful environment construction in inner

harbors U43

41

I Determination of level I indicator weights

As the ports competitiveness evaluation indicators at this level are complex

and the elements are not easily quantified AHP is adopted to determine the

indicator weights with the basic steps as follows

(1) Establish a comparative judgment matrix The comparative judgment

matrix is obtained through comparing contributed proportion of multiple

indicators to the overall target by the judgment scale wherein the fuzzy

judgment number introduced is 1 3 5 7 and 9 and the reciprocal of

such number indicates the important degree of one element relatively to

another The results are shown in next table

Table 422 Comparison matrix of level I indicators

A1 A2 A3 A4

A1 1 15 13 3

A2 5 1 3 7

A3 3 13 1 5

A4 13 17 15 1

(2) Calculate the characteristic vector of the comparative judgment matrix

which refers to the weighted vector of the indicator The writer adopts

42

the geometric method to calculate the characteristic vector The

calculated result is as follows

ω=(012 0560 026 006)T λmax=418 It can be obtained from the table

RI=09 Wherein ω is the characteristic vector corresponding to the

maximum characteristic value λmax of the comparative judgment matrix

namely the weighted vector of the indicator RI is the average

consistency indicator as shown in following table

Table423 Average random consistency indicator RI

Matrix Order

RI

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

0 0 058 09 112 124 132 141

Matrix Order

RI

9 10 11 12 13 14 15

145 149 152 154 156 158 159

(3) Conduct consistency check on the comparative judgment matrix Adopt

the random consistency proportion CR to judge the consistency of the

comparative judgment matrix According to CI= (λmax -n)(n-1) and

CR=CIRI it can be obtained through calculation CR=007lt01 Thus

this comparative judgment matrix has a satisfactory consistency and the

indicator weight coefficient calculated through this matrix is acceptable

43

II Determination of level II indicator weights

The data at this level are the details of level Ⅰ indicator The judgment

matrix obtained through comparing multiple sub-indicators under Level Ⅰ

indicators is adopted to determine the weights of sub-indicators under each

indicator one by one The specific steps are as follows

(1) The experts score the weights within the given range To determine the

weights of several small indicators under the same big indicator it is

supposed that the score of small indicator ｋ under the indicator j made

by the expert i is Xijk wherein i=12n n is the total number of

experts ј=12m m is the total number of LevelⅡ indicator к

=12Oj Oj is the number of small indicators under the big indicator ј

іјк IJK LRC l I j k

(2) The credit rating of the expert і is l l =1 2 3 l =1 indicates this expert

is quite familiar with the evaluated contents l =2 indicator this expert is

44

with the evaluated contents l =3 indicates this expert is not quite familiar

with the evaluated contents yi1 is the=08 yi2 =05 and yi3=1

(3) The comprehensive evaluation score of small indicator l under the

indicator j is as follows

(4) The formula for normalization processing of indicator weights is as

follows and the absolute weight of the indicator set is marked as

q=(q1q2q11)

(5) Because of the same justification and principle we donrsquot give the detail

about the calculation The same with the level Ⅰ calculation we

manipulation data one by one and get 14 results And obtain the average

45

results by weighted average method The results detail as Table for the

final weights of Level-Ⅱ evaluation indicators

Above the calculation process and method are just one of data from the

questionable surveys In this study the final results are got from the

weighted average by the results of each questionable survey

The final results are shown as Table424

Table424 Indicator weights table of indicator system

Level I

indicators Weight LevelⅡ indicators

Relative

weight

Absolute

weight

Importance

percentage

Port Facilities

A1 02735

e-RTGC U11 05506 01506 1506

AMP U12 01648 00451 451

AGV U13 02826 00773 773

Port Rates and

Charges A2

02902

Green ship certification s

ystem U21 04724 01371 1371

Incentives on the new

clean technology U22 02871 00833 833

Green Flag (speed

reduction incentive)U23 02405 00698 698

Inland

connection A3

02865

Eco-friendly means of

transport U31 05942 01702 1702

Joint distribution U32 04058 01163 1163

Social

environmentA4 00863

Cost on amount of CO2

emission U41 03698 00319 319

CO2 emissions reduction

policies U42 02273 00196 196

Beautiful environment

construction in inner

harbors U43

04029 00348 348

46

III Case study

In the questionable survey we also got the mark of Green Port measures

evaluation value of many main ports such as Singapore Port Shanghai Port

Hongkong Port Busan Port LALB Port Rotterdam Port and Yocohama Port

The highest mark is 5 and lowest one is 1

Table425 Evaluation value of many main ports

Singapore

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

LALB

Port

Rotterdam

Port

Yocohama

Port

Port facilities 38000 36000 34000 38182 38000 42000 32000

Port rates and

charges 32000 36000 31000 35455 32000 39000 33000

Inland

connection 39000 34545 35000 29091 35000 45000 36000

Social

circumstance 42000 32727 41000 32000 38000 42727 36000

With the Green Port and Port competitiveness indicator weights results these

ports got the final evaluation value

47

Table426 Final evaluation value on main ports Green Port measures and

competitiveness

Rotterdam

Port

Singapore

Port

LALB

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

Yocohama

Port

394 345 330 330 319 318 317

43 Results Analysis

From the results table we can obtain the many results as following

① The main Green Port measures which are more important to improve port

competitiveness are Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system the indicator weights are 01702 01506 and

01371 among the 11 indicators

② In the Green Port construction Cost on amount of CO2 emission and CO2

emissions reduction policies are the restrictions indicators but the weight

of two indicators are not big 00319 and 00196 So effect on Green Port

construction to port competitiveness does have the weaken capacity but

not clearly strengthen more clearly Thus Green Port construction really

could improve the port competitiveness

48

③ In the case study traditional ports Rotterdam and Singapore Port give us

better examples on Green Port construction especially Rotterdam Port

④ Hongkong Busan and Yocohama Port all got a lower evaluation value

But in detail Hongkong and Yocohama Port got a lower on the port

facilities and rates and charges Busan Port got a higher on the port

facilities and rates and charges but a lower on the inland connection and

social circumstance

⑤ Shanghai Port doesnrsquot have Particular strength factors but the

comprehensive strength is not bad the same as LALB Port

49

Chapter 5 Conclusion

In this thesis the effects of Green Port construction for improving the port

competitiveness have been studied Under the definition of Green Port the

characteristics of Green Port and its effects has been shown by analysing the AHP

method which based on the questionary survey for Green Port specialists and port

officers

Follow the results of analysis on Green Port competitiveness AHP model

Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green ship certification system is

better for Green Port Construction welcome for shipping companies and citizens

who live around the port And in the analysis of Port competitiveness factors port

rates and charges always affects port competitiveness a lot As a trend inland

connection factor abstracts more attention of shipping companies

50

On the trend of port department each port should take a activity to adjust

strategy for improving its competitiveness Such as in the main ports evaluation

Busan port get a high value on port rates and charges and port facilities but as a

lower value on inland connection factor the final value is not as well as we look

forward In the evaluation of Singapore Port through it gets a lower value on rates

and charges higher value on inland connection and social circumstance causes the

final value are better So the Green Port Construction may be a trend in port

department

In the results of this thesis Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system are better solutions for Green Port Construction And

especially it can be verified that the port rates and charges always affects port

competitiveness Futhermore the investment for Green Port construction and its

effects have to be verified in the future

51

References

1 Hoyle B S and Smith J 1992 Transport and Development In Modern

transport geography edited by B S Hoyle R D Knowles (London Belhaven

Press)pp11-31

2 Beresford A K C De Souza A J R G and Pettit S J 2005 Stategic

development of liner shipping companies and terminal operators Ocean yearbook

19(Chicago 1L The University of Chicago Press) pp 732-750

3 Heaver T D 2002 Supply chain and logistics management implications for

liner shipping In The handbook of maritime economics and business edited by C

Grammenos (LondonLLP) pp 375-396

4 Park T E (2011) A Study on selection criteria of Green Port and evaluation of

major Korean port A masters thesis of graduate school of Incheon university

52

5 JeongBH (2009)Green port management policy directions in the green

growth era- The case of Gwangyang port in Republic of Korea Journal of Korea

Port Economic Association Vol25(3) p361-384

6 Lee J S Han N H(2009) A study on Green Port Revitalization According to

Air Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

7 Lee Y K Nan J W(2010)Green Logistics Policy Analysis and Implications

of Japan

8 Lee B S (2010)Tendency and Countermeasures on Green Logistics in Port

Logistics Company A masters thesis of graduate school of Korean Maritime

university

9 Lee J S (2009) A Study on Green Port Revitalization According to Air

Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

10 Zhang F Y Li Z Lu X J Yao X L(2008)Competitiveness of Inland

Ports Based on F-AHP

11 Port of Long Beach (2009) Green Port Policy wwwpolbcom

12 The port of Los Angeles wwwportoflosangelesorg

23

Table241 Green Port measures in port each department

Emission reduction programs

Ship

department

Shipping

in the

port

boundary

Obligation on the utilization of sulfur-low fuel

Reform ship engine and utilize hybrid

Speed reduce in the port entrance(a off-shore fee

incentive)

Off-shore AMP

Shift utilization system of clean fuel

Unloading and loading

department

Obligation on the utilization of sulfur-low fuel

Replace electrical equipment

Eco-driving

Truck department Hybrid yard tractor utilization

Promote aging truck replacement

Minimum the idling time

Others LED light in the Port

Develop renew and recycle resource energy

The Green Port measures in this study are e-RTGC AMP AGV Green Ship

certification system incentives on the new clean technology Green Flag(speed

reduction incentive)eco-friendly transport means conversion joint distribution

the cost on account of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction polities and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

The details and definition on each Green Port measure and the relationship with

Port Competitiveness will be expressed in next chapter

24

Chapter 3 The Relationship between Port

Competitiveness and Green Port Construction

31 Port Competitiveness Literature Review

Although past studies on port selection models have focused on port selection

made by port facilities port services port rates and charge and location

Murphy made a survey between 534 shipping companies and port authorities in

1989 and between 1850 shipping companies and port authorities in 1992

Comparing with other papers Murphys got a survey among more widely

objects In his paper port selection(port competitiveness) was seen to affected by

facilities situation appropriate pilotage max ship entrance probability the

25

capability of handling non-regular cargos whether to provide information of ship

nationality or not and port services level

In French model (1979) there are two factors affecting the port selection (port

competitiveness) endogenous factor and exogenous factor In endogenous factors

there are adequacy and physical plant condition of terminal facilities terminal rate

and charges frequency and geographic coverage of ship and freight services the

capacity of connecting to inland rails or transport net and the services provides for

the shipping or logistics And exogenous factors included the size and economic

capacity of hinterland as a source exports or market for imports national

economic situation trade policy and support established by government the

situation at home and abroad

The same as Frenchs paper in Paters paper in 1990 there are endogenous and

exogenous factors too In endogenous there are the services provides for the

shipping or logistics capacity of terminal facilities situation and condition of

facilities operation strategies established by port authority convenience to utilize

And the political situation at home and abroad social change economic factor

stabilized labor and capital However in 2004 there is a tremendous change in

Peters new paper There are four parts multi-modal process interface transport

modes infrastructure Multi-model Process part includes ship entrance rapid

speed and accuracy shipper and shipping companies reactive operation flexibility

Interface includes labor power information technology and so on And there are

26

ship calls frequency and amount of fleet factors in the transport modes part In the

infrastructure part includes port facility equipments and so on

Port facilities rates and charges services inland situation and social

circumstance factors affect the port selection and competitiveness a lot from the

research until 1992 by Murphy And in Lirn and Pater research 2003-2004 the

new and detail factors are shown to us

We can clearly see the contents in next table

27

Table 311 Prevention literature research results

Influence factors

French

(1979)

Endogenous

port facilities port rate and charges calls frequency port services

port connection with inland

Exogenous

economic size of hinterland national economic situation trade

policy home and abroad situation

Willingale

(1982)

voyage distance economy size entrance to port and route port

facilities max ship entrance probability port operation rates and

charges port authority scale of port

Slack

(1985)

cost of inland transportation port proximity ship demurrage

multi-transport

Peter

(1990)

Endogenous

port facilities condition of facilities operation strategies

convenience to utilize

Exogenous

political situation social change economic factor stabilized labor

and capital

UNCTAD

(1992)

port facilities services location level of financial industry

information communication system social circumstances economic

stability

Murphy

(1992)

facilities situation appropriate pilotage max ship entrance

probability the capability of handling non-regular cargos whether to

provide information of ship nationality or not port services level

Lirn

(2003-2004)

physical and technologic facilities geopolitical location port

operation and management shipping and terminal cost

Peter

(2004)

Multi-modal Process

ship entrance rapid speed and accuracy shipper and shipping

companies reactive operation flexibility

Interface labor and capital

Transport modes ship calls frequency and amount of fleet factors

28

And there are many experts and scholars research for the influence factors to

port selection and competitiveness in Korea The specific content follows table5

Table 312 Literature research in Korean academia

Influence factors

Jeon Il-su (1992) location facilities charges service level (EDI) terminal operation

port authority

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

( 1993 )

location facilities throughput charges service operation

situation

Kim Hak-so

(1993)

export shipping amount of annual cost of each ton of cargo

marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km of

cargo loading time

import marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km

of cargo amount of liner ship

Yeo Gi-tae (1996) location facilities throughput charge service operation situation

Ha Dong-u amp

Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

location facilities service level logistics charges environment of

logistics service

Yeo Gi-tae (1999) location facilities throughput charges service

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

throughput quay length yard area GNP

Kum Jong-su

(2001)

distance between port and cargo site terminal facilities service

the capacity of multi-transport capacity of cargo handling

administrative service rates and charges of inland transport

congestion

Yeo Gi-tae (2002) location throughput facilities service level

Kim Jin-gu (2002) port facilities location cargo amount rates and charges services

29

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005)

voyage degree to attract cargo cargo handling cost amount of

handling cargo connection to inland service reliability location

berth availability quay length feeder network depth

transshipment volumes cargo security profitability

offing degree to attract cargo berth availability cargo handling

cost transshipment volumes

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005)

cargo handling amount port facilities location rates and charges

level of service

Heo Yun-su

(2005)

port facilities rates and charges services marketing geopolitics

location economic and social circumstance

Kim Geun-seop

(2007)

port services facilities cargo handling amount location cost

productivity factor global factor

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) rates and charges services port characteristics

Many experts and scholars make a research on port selection and

competitiveness recently But the factors selection criteria are difference

Nevertheless the main factors are facilities services cost and so on

Therefore port competitiveness factors which chose in this study are port

facilities port services port rates and charges and social circumstance

However the main factors are not the whole factors any more more and more

detail factors and characteristic factors appearance Port selection and

competitiveness factors have changed And the development content is introduced

in next part

30

32 Port Competitiveness Development Tree

As mentioned above port facilities port rates and charges and port location are

the basic factors in the port selection and competitiveness

From the following table we can discover that first one facilities rates and

charges and location are the most important factor in port selection and

competitiveness second one the importance of social circumstance turns larger

inland connection is necessary all the time

Table 321 Main factor in the Pretentious Research

31

port facilities rates and

charges

inland

connection

social

circumstance location

French (1979) radic radic radic

Wiliingale (1982) radic radic

Slack (1985) radic

Pater (1990) radic radic

UNCTAD (1992) radic radic radic

Murphy(1992) radic

Jeon Il-su (1992) radic radic radic

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

(1993)

radic radic radic

Kim Hak-so

(1993) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1996) radic radic radic

Ha Dong-u

amp Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1998) radic radic radic

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

radic

Kum Jong-su

(2001) radic radic radic radic

Kim Jin-gu(2002) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(2002) radic radic

Lirn(2003-2004) radic radic radic

Pater(2004) radic

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005) radic radic radic

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005) radic radic radic

Heo Yun-su

(2005) radic radic radic radic

Kim Geun-seop

(2007) radic radic radic radic

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) radic

32

33 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green

Port Construction

Following the research above Port facilities rates and charges inland

connection and social circumstance are chose in this study port selection and

competitiveness department

e-RTGC Electric rubber tired gantry crane is a mobile gantry crane used for

stacking intermodal containers within the stacking areas of a container terminal

e-RTGC are used at container terminals and container storage yards to straddling

multiple lanes of railroad and container storage or when maximum storage

density in the container stack is desired

AMP is shorted for Alternative Marine Power and Itrsquos a facility which

provides the electric system in the land for ship which entry in the port The

facility can reduce emissions which ship get entrance in the port

AGV is a mobile robot that follows markers or wires in the floor or uses

vision or lasers They are most often used in industrial applications to move

materials around a manufacturing facility or a warehouse Automatic Guided

Vehicle systems work around-the-clock making continuous flow and just-in-time

delivery easier to achieve Application of the automatic guided vehicle has broade

33

ned during the late 20th century and they are no longer restricted to industrial

environments

The e-RTGC AMP and AGV are the new clean facilities and equipments in the

Green Port they donrsquot reduce the efficiency of handling cargo and they also

reduce the CO2 emission account

Green ship certification system if a ship utilizes clean and CO2 emission

reduction technology on the ship building adds equipment and management and

son on certification would be received And the port authority gives some

incentive and preferential treatment among 45 ports Such as a better schedule is

provided for green membership ship priority in handing cargo and discount on

entrance fee

Incentives on the new cleaning technology There are two expressions about

this measure one is that the port authority give a incentive to ship which have a

great utilization on the new cleaning technology and the other one is that

environment provide many incentives to the authority which utilize the new

cleaning technology in the port such as LED street lamp solar power cranes

Green flag The Green Flag incentive program was set up to encourage ships to

slow down in order to improve air quality The Green Flag program provides

approximately $2 million a year in discounts for vessel operators who slow their

ships to 12 knots (22kmh) or less within 20miles (32km) of the harbor

34

According to the Port the Green Flag program reduced air pollution by 600tons in

2007 and is expected to do better in 2008

All of Green ship certification system incentives on the new cleaning

technology and Green Flag are incentives provided for users of port and aimed at

reduce port rates and charges So the 3 measures belong to affect port rates and

charges

Eco-friendly transport means conversion Eco-friendly means of transport are

much accounted of green port for example railway discharge less GHG emission

than truck barge with a clean engine among the river and inshore canal

Joint distribution joint distribution is a collaborative system which port

provides among many logistics companies It can make the cargo handling speed

rapidly and reduce cargo storage time for CO2 emission reducing such as

refrigerated container In an addition it also makes the logistics companies

transport more efficient

Cost on amount of CO2 emission differenced from other port the cost on

amount of CO2 is included in the port cost The cost aims to reduce the CO2

emission directly

CO2 emission reduction policies compared with other traditional port Green

Port gives more cost discount and incentives but in an addition there are many

policies on CO2 emission restriction Such as aging trucks restrictions in inland

transport department ship entry speed reduced and fuel changed in the ship

35

department and so on Whether these restriction policies constrain port

development or not and the degree of these policies constrain port development

will be explain by the AHP results

Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors some ports in the

western countries are opened as a travel place for visitors so as to change the

polluted impress and raise the position in our heart

Cost on amount of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction policies and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors can affect the social

circumstance factor Whether these measures can or not improve the social

circumstance and port competitiveness we have to see the next calculation and

results

36

Chapter 4 The Green Port Competitiveness

Analysis

41 The Green Port Competitiveness Model by AHP

The AHP is one multi-criteria decision making method which has been

extensively applied to a variety of decision-making situations The multi-criteria

techniques are considered to be a promising framework for evaluation of

decision-making factors since they have the potential to take into account

conflicting multidimensional incommensurable and uncertain effects of

decisions explicitly

In order to apply the AHP method a hierarchical decision schema was

constructed by decomposing the decision problem into its decision elements

37

After that the importance or preferences of the decision elements are examined in

a pair-wise comparison to the elements in the hierarchy The parameters are

estimated using pair-wise comparisons between the importance of the attribute or

decision element in the function using data made by each responder Making

comparisons is a question of which of the two attributes is more import as well as

how much more important

Follow these theories the Green Port Competitiveness Model choose factors as

follow in port competitiveness factors part there are port facilities port rates and

charges inland connection social circumstance in Green Port construction part

there are e-RTGC AMP AGV green ship certification system green flag

incentives on the new cleaning technology eco-friendly transport means

conversion joint distribution CO2 emission reduction policies cost on amount of

CO2 emission beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

38

Figure 41 Green Port Competitiveness AHP model

Follow the Green Port Competitiveness AHP as shown we set a questionnaire

survey to many experts scholars working in logistics system area And we got 15

ones and 14 ones results are believable and integrated

42 Green Port Competitiveness Analysis

39

The key to construction of the factors which affects the port competitiveness

is to determine the conceptual model The selection of the factors directly affects

the evaluation of the result In order to ensure the accuracy objectivity and

practicality of evaluation results the following basic principles must be followed

when selecting factors systematic principles the principle of universal

comparability practical principle and goal-oriented principle In view of the

foregoing the competitiveness which affected by Green Port construction model

is made The analysis follows established principles of port competitiveness

evaluation taking into account the characteristics and functions of the port as well

as port facilities port services port rates and charges ship entrance inland

connection social circumstances and so on

(1) Port facilities

e-RTGC U11 AMP U12 AGV U13

(2) Port rates and charges

Green ship certification system U21 Incentives on the new clean

technology U22 Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

(3) Inland connection

Eco-friendly means of transport U31 Joint distribution U32

(4) Social circumstances

40

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41 CO2 emission reduction policies

U42 Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors U43

Table 421 Details of Level I and Level II values

Level I

indicators Symbol Level II indicators Symbol

Port facilities A1

e-RTGC U11

AMP U12

AGV U13

Port rates and

charges A2

Green ship certification system U21

Incentives on the new clean technology U22

Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

Inland

connection A3

Eco-friendly means of transport U31

Joint distribution U32

Social

circumstances A4

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41

CO2 emissions reduction policies U42

Beautiful environment construction in inner

harbors U43

41

I Determination of level I indicator weights

As the ports competitiveness evaluation indicators at this level are complex

and the elements are not easily quantified AHP is adopted to determine the

indicator weights with the basic steps as follows

(1) Establish a comparative judgment matrix The comparative judgment

matrix is obtained through comparing contributed proportion of multiple

indicators to the overall target by the judgment scale wherein the fuzzy

judgment number introduced is 1 3 5 7 and 9 and the reciprocal of

such number indicates the important degree of one element relatively to

another The results are shown in next table

Table 422 Comparison matrix of level I indicators

A1 A2 A3 A4

A1 1 15 13 3

A2 5 1 3 7

A3 3 13 1 5

A4 13 17 15 1

(2) Calculate the characteristic vector of the comparative judgment matrix

which refers to the weighted vector of the indicator The writer adopts

42

the geometric method to calculate the characteristic vector The

calculated result is as follows

ω=(012 0560 026 006)T λmax=418 It can be obtained from the table

RI=09 Wherein ω is the characteristic vector corresponding to the

maximum characteristic value λmax of the comparative judgment matrix

namely the weighted vector of the indicator RI is the average

consistency indicator as shown in following table

Table423 Average random consistency indicator RI

Matrix Order

RI

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

0 0 058 09 112 124 132 141

Matrix Order

RI

9 10 11 12 13 14 15

145 149 152 154 156 158 159

(3) Conduct consistency check on the comparative judgment matrix Adopt

the random consistency proportion CR to judge the consistency of the

comparative judgment matrix According to CI= (λmax -n)(n-1) and

CR=CIRI it can be obtained through calculation CR=007lt01 Thus

this comparative judgment matrix has a satisfactory consistency and the

indicator weight coefficient calculated through this matrix is acceptable

43

II Determination of level II indicator weights

The data at this level are the details of level Ⅰ indicator The judgment

matrix obtained through comparing multiple sub-indicators under Level Ⅰ

indicators is adopted to determine the weights of sub-indicators under each

indicator one by one The specific steps are as follows

(1) The experts score the weights within the given range To determine the

weights of several small indicators under the same big indicator it is

supposed that the score of small indicator ｋ under the indicator j made

by the expert i is Xijk wherein i=12n n is the total number of

experts ј=12m m is the total number of LevelⅡ indicator к

=12Oj Oj is the number of small indicators under the big indicator ј

іјк IJK LRC l I j k

(2) The credit rating of the expert і is l l =1 2 3 l =1 indicates this expert

is quite familiar with the evaluated contents l =2 indicator this expert is

44

with the evaluated contents l =3 indicates this expert is not quite familiar

with the evaluated contents yi1 is the=08 yi2 =05 and yi3=1

(3) The comprehensive evaluation score of small indicator l under the

indicator j is as follows

(4) The formula for normalization processing of indicator weights is as

follows and the absolute weight of the indicator set is marked as

q=(q1q2q11)

(5) Because of the same justification and principle we donrsquot give the detail

about the calculation The same with the level Ⅰ calculation we

manipulation data one by one and get 14 results And obtain the average

45

results by weighted average method The results detail as Table for the

final weights of Level-Ⅱ evaluation indicators

Above the calculation process and method are just one of data from the

questionable surveys In this study the final results are got from the

weighted average by the results of each questionable survey

The final results are shown as Table424

Table424 Indicator weights table of indicator system

Level I

indicators Weight LevelⅡ indicators

Relative

weight

Absolute

weight

Importance

percentage

Port Facilities

A1 02735

e-RTGC U11 05506 01506 1506

AMP U12 01648 00451 451

AGV U13 02826 00773 773

Port Rates and

Charges A2

02902

Green ship certification s

ystem U21 04724 01371 1371

Incentives on the new

clean technology U22 02871 00833 833

Green Flag (speed

reduction incentive)U23 02405 00698 698

Inland

connection A3

02865

Eco-friendly means of

transport U31 05942 01702 1702

Joint distribution U32 04058 01163 1163

Social

environmentA4 00863

Cost on amount of CO2

emission U41 03698 00319 319

CO2 emissions reduction

policies U42 02273 00196 196

Beautiful environment

construction in inner

harbors U43

04029 00348 348

46

III Case study

In the questionable survey we also got the mark of Green Port measures

evaluation value of many main ports such as Singapore Port Shanghai Port

Hongkong Port Busan Port LALB Port Rotterdam Port and Yocohama Port

The highest mark is 5 and lowest one is 1

Table425 Evaluation value of many main ports

Singapore

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

LALB

Port

Rotterdam

Port

Yocohama

Port

Port facilities 38000 36000 34000 38182 38000 42000 32000

Port rates and

charges 32000 36000 31000 35455 32000 39000 33000

Inland

connection 39000 34545 35000 29091 35000 45000 36000

Social

circumstance 42000 32727 41000 32000 38000 42727 36000

With the Green Port and Port competitiveness indicator weights results these

ports got the final evaluation value

47

Table426 Final evaluation value on main ports Green Port measures and

competitiveness

Rotterdam

Port

Singapore

Port

LALB

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

Yocohama

Port

394 345 330 330 319 318 317

43 Results Analysis

From the results table we can obtain the many results as following

① The main Green Port measures which are more important to improve port

competitiveness are Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system the indicator weights are 01702 01506 and

01371 among the 11 indicators

② In the Green Port construction Cost on amount of CO2 emission and CO2

emissions reduction policies are the restrictions indicators but the weight

of two indicators are not big 00319 and 00196 So effect on Green Port

construction to port competitiveness does have the weaken capacity but

not clearly strengthen more clearly Thus Green Port construction really

could improve the port competitiveness

48

③ In the case study traditional ports Rotterdam and Singapore Port give us

better examples on Green Port construction especially Rotterdam Port

④ Hongkong Busan and Yocohama Port all got a lower evaluation value

But in detail Hongkong and Yocohama Port got a lower on the port

facilities and rates and charges Busan Port got a higher on the port

facilities and rates and charges but a lower on the inland connection and

social circumstance

⑤ Shanghai Port doesnrsquot have Particular strength factors but the

comprehensive strength is not bad the same as LALB Port

49

Chapter 5 Conclusion

In this thesis the effects of Green Port construction for improving the port

competitiveness have been studied Under the definition of Green Port the

characteristics of Green Port and its effects has been shown by analysing the AHP

method which based on the questionary survey for Green Port specialists and port

officers

Follow the results of analysis on Green Port competitiveness AHP model

Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green ship certification system is

better for Green Port Construction welcome for shipping companies and citizens

who live around the port And in the analysis of Port competitiveness factors port

rates and charges always affects port competitiveness a lot As a trend inland

connection factor abstracts more attention of shipping companies

50

On the trend of port department each port should take a activity to adjust

strategy for improving its competitiveness Such as in the main ports evaluation

Busan port get a high value on port rates and charges and port facilities but as a

lower value on inland connection factor the final value is not as well as we look

forward In the evaluation of Singapore Port through it gets a lower value on rates

and charges higher value on inland connection and social circumstance causes the

final value are better So the Green Port Construction may be a trend in port

department

In the results of this thesis Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system are better solutions for Green Port Construction And

especially it can be verified that the port rates and charges always affects port

competitiveness Futhermore the investment for Green Port construction and its

effects have to be verified in the future

51

References

1 Hoyle B S and Smith J 1992 Transport and Development In Modern

transport geography edited by B S Hoyle R D Knowles (London Belhaven

Press)pp11-31

2 Beresford A K C De Souza A J R G and Pettit S J 2005 Stategic

development of liner shipping companies and terminal operators Ocean yearbook

19(Chicago 1L The University of Chicago Press) pp 732-750

3 Heaver T D 2002 Supply chain and logistics management implications for

liner shipping In The handbook of maritime economics and business edited by C

Grammenos (LondonLLP) pp 375-396

4 Park T E (2011) A Study on selection criteria of Green Port and evaluation of

major Korean port A masters thesis of graduate school of Incheon university

52

5 JeongBH (2009)Green port management policy directions in the green

growth era- The case of Gwangyang port in Republic of Korea Journal of Korea

Port Economic Association Vol25(3) p361-384

6 Lee J S Han N H(2009) A study on Green Port Revitalization According to

Air Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

7 Lee Y K Nan J W(2010)Green Logistics Policy Analysis and Implications

of Japan

8 Lee B S (2010)Tendency and Countermeasures on Green Logistics in Port

Logistics Company A masters thesis of graduate school of Korean Maritime

university

9 Lee J S (2009) A Study on Green Port Revitalization According to Air

Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

10 Zhang F Y Li Z Lu X J Yao X L(2008)Competitiveness of Inland

Ports Based on F-AHP

11 Port of Long Beach (2009) Green Port Policy wwwpolbcom

12 The port of Los Angeles wwwportoflosangelesorg

24

Chapter 3 The Relationship between Port

Competitiveness and Green Port Construction

31 Port Competitiveness Literature Review

Although past studies on port selection models have focused on port selection

made by port facilities port services port rates and charge and location

Murphy made a survey between 534 shipping companies and port authorities in

1989 and between 1850 shipping companies and port authorities in 1992

Comparing with other papers Murphys got a survey among more widely

objects In his paper port selection(port competitiveness) was seen to affected by

facilities situation appropriate pilotage max ship entrance probability the

25

capability of handling non-regular cargos whether to provide information of ship

nationality or not and port services level

In French model (1979) there are two factors affecting the port selection (port

competitiveness) endogenous factor and exogenous factor In endogenous factors

there are adequacy and physical plant condition of terminal facilities terminal rate

and charges frequency and geographic coverage of ship and freight services the

capacity of connecting to inland rails or transport net and the services provides for

the shipping or logistics And exogenous factors included the size and economic

capacity of hinterland as a source exports or market for imports national

economic situation trade policy and support established by government the

situation at home and abroad

The same as Frenchs paper in Paters paper in 1990 there are endogenous and

exogenous factors too In endogenous there are the services provides for the

shipping or logistics capacity of terminal facilities situation and condition of

facilities operation strategies established by port authority convenience to utilize

And the political situation at home and abroad social change economic factor

stabilized labor and capital However in 2004 there is a tremendous change in

Peters new paper There are four parts multi-modal process interface transport

modes infrastructure Multi-model Process part includes ship entrance rapid

speed and accuracy shipper and shipping companies reactive operation flexibility

Interface includes labor power information technology and so on And there are

26

ship calls frequency and amount of fleet factors in the transport modes part In the

infrastructure part includes port facility equipments and so on

Port facilities rates and charges services inland situation and social

circumstance factors affect the port selection and competitiveness a lot from the

research until 1992 by Murphy And in Lirn and Pater research 2003-2004 the

new and detail factors are shown to us

We can clearly see the contents in next table

27

Table 311 Prevention literature research results

Influence factors

French

(1979)

Endogenous

port facilities port rate and charges calls frequency port services

port connection with inland

Exogenous

economic size of hinterland national economic situation trade

policy home and abroad situation

Willingale

(1982)

voyage distance economy size entrance to port and route port

facilities max ship entrance probability port operation rates and

charges port authority scale of port

Slack

(1985)

cost of inland transportation port proximity ship demurrage

multi-transport

Peter

(1990)

Endogenous

port facilities condition of facilities operation strategies

convenience to utilize

Exogenous

political situation social change economic factor stabilized labor

and capital

UNCTAD

(1992)

port facilities services location level of financial industry

information communication system social circumstances economic

stability

Murphy

(1992)

facilities situation appropriate pilotage max ship entrance

probability the capability of handling non-regular cargos whether to

provide information of ship nationality or not port services level

Lirn

(2003-2004)

physical and technologic facilities geopolitical location port

operation and management shipping and terminal cost

Peter

(2004)

Multi-modal Process

ship entrance rapid speed and accuracy shipper and shipping

companies reactive operation flexibility

Interface labor and capital

Transport modes ship calls frequency and amount of fleet factors

28

And there are many experts and scholars research for the influence factors to

port selection and competitiveness in Korea The specific content follows table5

Table 312 Literature research in Korean academia

Influence factors

Jeon Il-su (1992) location facilities charges service level (EDI) terminal operation

port authority

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

( 1993 )

location facilities throughput charges service operation

situation

Kim Hak-so

(1993)

export shipping amount of annual cost of each ton of cargo

marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km of

cargo loading time

import marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km

of cargo amount of liner ship

Yeo Gi-tae (1996) location facilities throughput charge service operation situation

Ha Dong-u amp

Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

location facilities service level logistics charges environment of

logistics service

Yeo Gi-tae (1999) location facilities throughput charges service

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

throughput quay length yard area GNP

Kum Jong-su

(2001)

distance between port and cargo site terminal facilities service

the capacity of multi-transport capacity of cargo handling

administrative service rates and charges of inland transport

congestion

Yeo Gi-tae (2002) location throughput facilities service level

Kim Jin-gu (2002) port facilities location cargo amount rates and charges services

29

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005)

voyage degree to attract cargo cargo handling cost amount of

handling cargo connection to inland service reliability location

berth availability quay length feeder network depth

transshipment volumes cargo security profitability

offing degree to attract cargo berth availability cargo handling

cost transshipment volumes

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005)

cargo handling amount port facilities location rates and charges

level of service

Heo Yun-su

(2005)

port facilities rates and charges services marketing geopolitics

location economic and social circumstance

Kim Geun-seop

(2007)

port services facilities cargo handling amount location cost

productivity factor global factor

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) rates and charges services port characteristics

Many experts and scholars make a research on port selection and

competitiveness recently But the factors selection criteria are difference

Nevertheless the main factors are facilities services cost and so on

Therefore port competitiveness factors which chose in this study are port

facilities port services port rates and charges and social circumstance

However the main factors are not the whole factors any more more and more

detail factors and characteristic factors appearance Port selection and

competitiveness factors have changed And the development content is introduced

in next part

30

32 Port Competitiveness Development Tree

As mentioned above port facilities port rates and charges and port location are

the basic factors in the port selection and competitiveness

From the following table we can discover that first one facilities rates and

charges and location are the most important factor in port selection and

competitiveness second one the importance of social circumstance turns larger

inland connection is necessary all the time

Table 321 Main factor in the Pretentious Research

31

port facilities rates and

charges

inland

connection

social

circumstance location

French (1979) radic radic radic

Wiliingale (1982) radic radic

Slack (1985) radic

Pater (1990) radic radic

UNCTAD (1992) radic radic radic

Murphy(1992) radic

Jeon Il-su (1992) radic radic radic

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

(1993)

radic radic radic

Kim Hak-so

(1993) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1996) radic radic radic

Ha Dong-u

amp Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1998) radic radic radic

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

radic

Kum Jong-su

(2001) radic radic radic radic

Kim Jin-gu(2002) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(2002) radic radic

Lirn(2003-2004) radic radic radic

Pater(2004) radic

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005) radic radic radic

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005) radic radic radic

Heo Yun-su

(2005) radic radic radic radic

Kim Geun-seop

(2007) radic radic radic radic

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) radic

32

33 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green

Port Construction

Following the research above Port facilities rates and charges inland

connection and social circumstance are chose in this study port selection and

competitiveness department

e-RTGC Electric rubber tired gantry crane is a mobile gantry crane used for

stacking intermodal containers within the stacking areas of a container terminal

e-RTGC are used at container terminals and container storage yards to straddling

multiple lanes of railroad and container storage or when maximum storage

density in the container stack is desired

AMP is shorted for Alternative Marine Power and Itrsquos a facility which

provides the electric system in the land for ship which entry in the port The

facility can reduce emissions which ship get entrance in the port

AGV is a mobile robot that follows markers or wires in the floor or uses

vision or lasers They are most often used in industrial applications to move

materials around a manufacturing facility or a warehouse Automatic Guided

Vehicle systems work around-the-clock making continuous flow and just-in-time

delivery easier to achieve Application of the automatic guided vehicle has broade

33

ned during the late 20th century and they are no longer restricted to industrial

environments

The e-RTGC AMP and AGV are the new clean facilities and equipments in the

Green Port they donrsquot reduce the efficiency of handling cargo and they also

reduce the CO2 emission account

Green ship certification system if a ship utilizes clean and CO2 emission

reduction technology on the ship building adds equipment and management and

son on certification would be received And the port authority gives some

incentive and preferential treatment among 45 ports Such as a better schedule is

provided for green membership ship priority in handing cargo and discount on

entrance fee

Incentives on the new cleaning technology There are two expressions about

this measure one is that the port authority give a incentive to ship which have a

great utilization on the new cleaning technology and the other one is that

environment provide many incentives to the authority which utilize the new

cleaning technology in the port such as LED street lamp solar power cranes

Green flag The Green Flag incentive program was set up to encourage ships to

slow down in order to improve air quality The Green Flag program provides

approximately $2 million a year in discounts for vessel operators who slow their

ships to 12 knots (22kmh) or less within 20miles (32km) of the harbor

34

According to the Port the Green Flag program reduced air pollution by 600tons in

2007 and is expected to do better in 2008

All of Green ship certification system incentives on the new cleaning

technology and Green Flag are incentives provided for users of port and aimed at

reduce port rates and charges So the 3 measures belong to affect port rates and

charges

Eco-friendly transport means conversion Eco-friendly means of transport are

much accounted of green port for example railway discharge less GHG emission

than truck barge with a clean engine among the river and inshore canal

Joint distribution joint distribution is a collaborative system which port

provides among many logistics companies It can make the cargo handling speed

rapidly and reduce cargo storage time for CO2 emission reducing such as

refrigerated container In an addition it also makes the logistics companies

transport more efficient

Cost on amount of CO2 emission differenced from other port the cost on

amount of CO2 is included in the port cost The cost aims to reduce the CO2

emission directly

CO2 emission reduction policies compared with other traditional port Green

Port gives more cost discount and incentives but in an addition there are many

policies on CO2 emission restriction Such as aging trucks restrictions in inland

transport department ship entry speed reduced and fuel changed in the ship

35

department and so on Whether these restriction policies constrain port

development or not and the degree of these policies constrain port development

will be explain by the AHP results

Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors some ports in the

western countries are opened as a travel place for visitors so as to change the

polluted impress and raise the position in our heart

Cost on amount of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction policies and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors can affect the social

circumstance factor Whether these measures can or not improve the social

circumstance and port competitiveness we have to see the next calculation and

results

36

Chapter 4 The Green Port Competitiveness

Analysis

41 The Green Port Competitiveness Model by AHP

The AHP is one multi-criteria decision making method which has been

extensively applied to a variety of decision-making situations The multi-criteria

techniques are considered to be a promising framework for evaluation of

decision-making factors since they have the potential to take into account

conflicting multidimensional incommensurable and uncertain effects of

decisions explicitly

In order to apply the AHP method a hierarchical decision schema was

constructed by decomposing the decision problem into its decision elements

37

After that the importance or preferences of the decision elements are examined in

a pair-wise comparison to the elements in the hierarchy The parameters are

estimated using pair-wise comparisons between the importance of the attribute or

decision element in the function using data made by each responder Making

comparisons is a question of which of the two attributes is more import as well as

how much more important

Follow these theories the Green Port Competitiveness Model choose factors as

follow in port competitiveness factors part there are port facilities port rates and

charges inland connection social circumstance in Green Port construction part

there are e-RTGC AMP AGV green ship certification system green flag

incentives on the new cleaning technology eco-friendly transport means

conversion joint distribution CO2 emission reduction policies cost on amount of

CO2 emission beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

38

Figure 41 Green Port Competitiveness AHP model

Follow the Green Port Competitiveness AHP as shown we set a questionnaire

survey to many experts scholars working in logistics system area And we got 15

ones and 14 ones results are believable and integrated

42 Green Port Competitiveness Analysis

39

The key to construction of the factors which affects the port competitiveness

is to determine the conceptual model The selection of the factors directly affects

the evaluation of the result In order to ensure the accuracy objectivity and

practicality of evaluation results the following basic principles must be followed

when selecting factors systematic principles the principle of universal

comparability practical principle and goal-oriented principle In view of the

foregoing the competitiveness which affected by Green Port construction model

is made The analysis follows established principles of port competitiveness

evaluation taking into account the characteristics and functions of the port as well

as port facilities port services port rates and charges ship entrance inland

connection social circumstances and so on

(1) Port facilities

e-RTGC U11 AMP U12 AGV U13

(2) Port rates and charges

Green ship certification system U21 Incentives on the new clean

technology U22 Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

(3) Inland connection

Eco-friendly means of transport U31 Joint distribution U32

(4) Social circumstances

40

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41 CO2 emission reduction policies

U42 Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors U43

Table 421 Details of Level I and Level II values

Level I

indicators Symbol Level II indicators Symbol

Port facilities A1

e-RTGC U11

AMP U12

AGV U13

Port rates and

charges A2

Green ship certification system U21

Incentives on the new clean technology U22

Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

Inland

connection A3

Eco-friendly means of transport U31

Joint distribution U32

Social

circumstances A4

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41

CO2 emissions reduction policies U42

Beautiful environment construction in inner

harbors U43

41

I Determination of level I indicator weights

As the ports competitiveness evaluation indicators at this level are complex

and the elements are not easily quantified AHP is adopted to determine the

indicator weights with the basic steps as follows

(1) Establish a comparative judgment matrix The comparative judgment

matrix is obtained through comparing contributed proportion of multiple

indicators to the overall target by the judgment scale wherein the fuzzy

judgment number introduced is 1 3 5 7 and 9 and the reciprocal of

such number indicates the important degree of one element relatively to

another The results are shown in next table

Table 422 Comparison matrix of level I indicators

A1 A2 A3 A4

A1 1 15 13 3

A2 5 1 3 7

A3 3 13 1 5

A4 13 17 15 1

(2) Calculate the characteristic vector of the comparative judgment matrix

which refers to the weighted vector of the indicator The writer adopts

42

the geometric method to calculate the characteristic vector The

calculated result is as follows

ω=(012 0560 026 006)T λmax=418 It can be obtained from the table

RI=09 Wherein ω is the characteristic vector corresponding to the

maximum characteristic value λmax of the comparative judgment matrix

namely the weighted vector of the indicator RI is the average

consistency indicator as shown in following table

Table423 Average random consistency indicator RI

Matrix Order

RI

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

0 0 058 09 112 124 132 141

Matrix Order

RI

9 10 11 12 13 14 15

145 149 152 154 156 158 159

(3) Conduct consistency check on the comparative judgment matrix Adopt

the random consistency proportion CR to judge the consistency of the

comparative judgment matrix According to CI= (λmax -n)(n-1) and

CR=CIRI it can be obtained through calculation CR=007lt01 Thus

this comparative judgment matrix has a satisfactory consistency and the

indicator weight coefficient calculated through this matrix is acceptable

43

II Determination of level II indicator weights

The data at this level are the details of level Ⅰ indicator The judgment

matrix obtained through comparing multiple sub-indicators under Level Ⅰ

indicators is adopted to determine the weights of sub-indicators under each

indicator one by one The specific steps are as follows

(1) The experts score the weights within the given range To determine the

weights of several small indicators under the same big indicator it is

supposed that the score of small indicator ｋ under the indicator j made

by the expert i is Xijk wherein i=12n n is the total number of

experts ј=12m m is the total number of LevelⅡ indicator к

=12Oj Oj is the number of small indicators under the big indicator ј

іјк IJK LRC l I j k

(2) The credit rating of the expert і is l l =1 2 3 l =1 indicates this expert

is quite familiar with the evaluated contents l =2 indicator this expert is

44

with the evaluated contents l =3 indicates this expert is not quite familiar

with the evaluated contents yi1 is the=08 yi2 =05 and yi3=1

(3) The comprehensive evaluation score of small indicator l under the

indicator j is as follows

(4) The formula for normalization processing of indicator weights is as

follows and the absolute weight of the indicator set is marked as

q=(q1q2q11)

(5) Because of the same justification and principle we donrsquot give the detail

about the calculation The same with the level Ⅰ calculation we

manipulation data one by one and get 14 results And obtain the average

45

results by weighted average method The results detail as Table for the

final weights of Level-Ⅱ evaluation indicators

Above the calculation process and method are just one of data from the

questionable surveys In this study the final results are got from the

weighted average by the results of each questionable survey

The final results are shown as Table424

Table424 Indicator weights table of indicator system

Level I

indicators Weight LevelⅡ indicators

Relative

weight

Absolute

weight

Importance

percentage

Port Facilities

A1 02735

e-RTGC U11 05506 01506 1506

AMP U12 01648 00451 451

AGV U13 02826 00773 773

Port Rates and

Charges A2

02902

Green ship certification s

ystem U21 04724 01371 1371

Incentives on the new

clean technology U22 02871 00833 833

Green Flag (speed

reduction incentive)U23 02405 00698 698

Inland

connection A3

02865

Eco-friendly means of

transport U31 05942 01702 1702

Joint distribution U32 04058 01163 1163

Social

environmentA4 00863

Cost on amount of CO2

emission U41 03698 00319 319

CO2 emissions reduction

policies U42 02273 00196 196

Beautiful environment

construction in inner

harbors U43

04029 00348 348

46

III Case study

In the questionable survey we also got the mark of Green Port measures

evaluation value of many main ports such as Singapore Port Shanghai Port

Hongkong Port Busan Port LALB Port Rotterdam Port and Yocohama Port

The highest mark is 5 and lowest one is 1

Table425 Evaluation value of many main ports

Singapore

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

LALB

Port

Rotterdam

Port

Yocohama

Port

Port facilities 38000 36000 34000 38182 38000 42000 32000

Port rates and

charges 32000 36000 31000 35455 32000 39000 33000

Inland

connection 39000 34545 35000 29091 35000 45000 36000

Social

circumstance 42000 32727 41000 32000 38000 42727 36000

With the Green Port and Port competitiveness indicator weights results these

ports got the final evaluation value

47

Table426 Final evaluation value on main ports Green Port measures and

competitiveness

Rotterdam

Port

Singapore

Port

LALB

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

Yocohama

Port

394 345 330 330 319 318 317

43 Results Analysis

From the results table we can obtain the many results as following

① The main Green Port measures which are more important to improve port

competitiveness are Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system the indicator weights are 01702 01506 and

01371 among the 11 indicators

② In the Green Port construction Cost on amount of CO2 emission and CO2

emissions reduction policies are the restrictions indicators but the weight

of two indicators are not big 00319 and 00196 So effect on Green Port

construction to port competitiveness does have the weaken capacity but

not clearly strengthen more clearly Thus Green Port construction really

could improve the port competitiveness

48

③ In the case study traditional ports Rotterdam and Singapore Port give us

better examples on Green Port construction especially Rotterdam Port

④ Hongkong Busan and Yocohama Port all got a lower evaluation value

But in detail Hongkong and Yocohama Port got a lower on the port

facilities and rates and charges Busan Port got a higher on the port

facilities and rates and charges but a lower on the inland connection and

social circumstance

⑤ Shanghai Port doesnrsquot have Particular strength factors but the

comprehensive strength is not bad the same as LALB Port

49

Chapter 5 Conclusion

In this thesis the effects of Green Port construction for improving the port

competitiveness have been studied Under the definition of Green Port the

characteristics of Green Port and its effects has been shown by analysing the AHP

method which based on the questionary survey for Green Port specialists and port

officers

Follow the results of analysis on Green Port competitiveness AHP model

Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green ship certification system is

better for Green Port Construction welcome for shipping companies and citizens

who live around the port And in the analysis of Port competitiveness factors port

rates and charges always affects port competitiveness a lot As a trend inland

connection factor abstracts more attention of shipping companies

50

On the trend of port department each port should take a activity to adjust

strategy for improving its competitiveness Such as in the main ports evaluation

Busan port get a high value on port rates and charges and port facilities but as a

lower value on inland connection factor the final value is not as well as we look

forward In the evaluation of Singapore Port through it gets a lower value on rates

and charges higher value on inland connection and social circumstance causes the

final value are better So the Green Port Construction may be a trend in port

department

In the results of this thesis Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system are better solutions for Green Port Construction And

especially it can be verified that the port rates and charges always affects port

competitiveness Futhermore the investment for Green Port construction and its

effects have to be verified in the future

51

References

1 Hoyle B S and Smith J 1992 Transport and Development In Modern

transport geography edited by B S Hoyle R D Knowles (London Belhaven

Press)pp11-31

2 Beresford A K C De Souza A J R G and Pettit S J 2005 Stategic

development of liner shipping companies and terminal operators Ocean yearbook

19(Chicago 1L The University of Chicago Press) pp 732-750

3 Heaver T D 2002 Supply chain and logistics management implications for

liner shipping In The handbook of maritime economics and business edited by C

Grammenos (LondonLLP) pp 375-396

4 Park T E (2011) A Study on selection criteria of Green Port and evaluation of

major Korean port A masters thesis of graduate school of Incheon university

52

5 JeongBH (2009)Green port management policy directions in the green

growth era- The case of Gwangyang port in Republic of Korea Journal of Korea

Port Economic Association Vol25(3) p361-384

6 Lee J S Han N H(2009) A study on Green Port Revitalization According to

Air Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

7 Lee Y K Nan J W(2010)Green Logistics Policy Analysis and Implications

of Japan

8 Lee B S (2010)Tendency and Countermeasures on Green Logistics in Port

Logistics Company A masters thesis of graduate school of Korean Maritime

university

9 Lee J S (2009) A Study on Green Port Revitalization According to Air

Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

10 Zhang F Y Li Z Lu X J Yao X L(2008)Competitiveness of Inland

Ports Based on F-AHP

11 Port of Long Beach (2009) Green Port Policy wwwpolbcom

12 The port of Los Angeles wwwportoflosangelesorg

25

capability of handling non-regular cargos whether to provide information of ship

nationality or not and port services level

In French model (1979) there are two factors affecting the port selection (port

competitiveness) endogenous factor and exogenous factor In endogenous factors

there are adequacy and physical plant condition of terminal facilities terminal rate

and charges frequency and geographic coverage of ship and freight services the

capacity of connecting to inland rails or transport net and the services provides for

the shipping or logistics And exogenous factors included the size and economic

capacity of hinterland as a source exports or market for imports national

economic situation trade policy and support established by government the

situation at home and abroad

The same as Frenchs paper in Paters paper in 1990 there are endogenous and

exogenous factors too In endogenous there are the services provides for the

shipping or logistics capacity of terminal facilities situation and condition of

facilities operation strategies established by port authority convenience to utilize

And the political situation at home and abroad social change economic factor

stabilized labor and capital However in 2004 there is a tremendous change in

Peters new paper There are four parts multi-modal process interface transport

modes infrastructure Multi-model Process part includes ship entrance rapid

speed and accuracy shipper and shipping companies reactive operation flexibility

Interface includes labor power information technology and so on And there are

26

ship calls frequency and amount of fleet factors in the transport modes part In the

infrastructure part includes port facility equipments and so on

Port facilities rates and charges services inland situation and social

circumstance factors affect the port selection and competitiveness a lot from the

research until 1992 by Murphy And in Lirn and Pater research 2003-2004 the

new and detail factors are shown to us

We can clearly see the contents in next table

27

Table 311 Prevention literature research results

Influence factors

French

(1979)

Endogenous

port facilities port rate and charges calls frequency port services

port connection with inland

Exogenous

economic size of hinterland national economic situation trade

policy home and abroad situation

Willingale

(1982)

voyage distance economy size entrance to port and route port

facilities max ship entrance probability port operation rates and

charges port authority scale of port

Slack

(1985)

cost of inland transportation port proximity ship demurrage

multi-transport

Peter

(1990)

Endogenous

port facilities condition of facilities operation strategies

convenience to utilize

Exogenous

political situation social change economic factor stabilized labor

and capital

UNCTAD

(1992)

port facilities services location level of financial industry

information communication system social circumstances economic

stability

Murphy

(1992)

facilities situation appropriate pilotage max ship entrance

probability the capability of handling non-regular cargos whether to

provide information of ship nationality or not port services level

Lirn

(2003-2004)

physical and technologic facilities geopolitical location port

operation and management shipping and terminal cost

Peter

(2004)

Multi-modal Process

ship entrance rapid speed and accuracy shipper and shipping

companies reactive operation flexibility

Interface labor and capital

Transport modes ship calls frequency and amount of fleet factors

28

And there are many experts and scholars research for the influence factors to

port selection and competitiveness in Korea The specific content follows table5

Table 312 Literature research in Korean academia

Influence factors

Jeon Il-su (1992) location facilities charges service level (EDI) terminal operation

port authority

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

( 1993 )

location facilities throughput charges service operation

situation

Kim Hak-so

(1993)

export shipping amount of annual cost of each ton of cargo

marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km of

cargo loading time

import marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km

of cargo amount of liner ship

Yeo Gi-tae (1996) location facilities throughput charge service operation situation

Ha Dong-u amp

Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

location facilities service level logistics charges environment of

logistics service

Yeo Gi-tae (1999) location facilities throughput charges service

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

throughput quay length yard area GNP

Kum Jong-su

(2001)

distance between port and cargo site terminal facilities service

the capacity of multi-transport capacity of cargo handling

administrative service rates and charges of inland transport

congestion

Yeo Gi-tae (2002) location throughput facilities service level

Kim Jin-gu (2002) port facilities location cargo amount rates and charges services

29

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005)

voyage degree to attract cargo cargo handling cost amount of

handling cargo connection to inland service reliability location

berth availability quay length feeder network depth

transshipment volumes cargo security profitability

offing degree to attract cargo berth availability cargo handling

cost transshipment volumes

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005)

cargo handling amount port facilities location rates and charges

level of service

Heo Yun-su

(2005)

port facilities rates and charges services marketing geopolitics

location economic and social circumstance

Kim Geun-seop

(2007)

port services facilities cargo handling amount location cost

productivity factor global factor

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) rates and charges services port characteristics

Many experts and scholars make a research on port selection and

competitiveness recently But the factors selection criteria are difference

Nevertheless the main factors are facilities services cost and so on

Therefore port competitiveness factors which chose in this study are port

facilities port services port rates and charges and social circumstance

However the main factors are not the whole factors any more more and more

detail factors and characteristic factors appearance Port selection and

competitiveness factors have changed And the development content is introduced

in next part

30

32 Port Competitiveness Development Tree

As mentioned above port facilities port rates and charges and port location are

the basic factors in the port selection and competitiveness

From the following table we can discover that first one facilities rates and

charges and location are the most important factor in port selection and

competitiveness second one the importance of social circumstance turns larger

inland connection is necessary all the time

Table 321 Main factor in the Pretentious Research

31

port facilities rates and

charges

inland

connection

social

circumstance location

French (1979) radic radic radic

Wiliingale (1982) radic radic

Slack (1985) radic

Pater (1990) radic radic

UNCTAD (1992) radic radic radic

Murphy(1992) radic

Jeon Il-su (1992) radic radic radic

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

(1993)

radic radic radic

Kim Hak-so

(1993) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1996) radic radic radic

Ha Dong-u

amp Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1998) radic radic radic

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

radic

Kum Jong-su

(2001) radic radic radic radic

Kim Jin-gu(2002) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(2002) radic radic

Lirn(2003-2004) radic radic radic

Pater(2004) radic

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005) radic radic radic

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005) radic radic radic

Heo Yun-su

(2005) radic radic radic radic

Kim Geun-seop

(2007) radic radic radic radic

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) radic

32

33 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green

Port Construction

Following the research above Port facilities rates and charges inland

connection and social circumstance are chose in this study port selection and

competitiveness department

e-RTGC Electric rubber tired gantry crane is a mobile gantry crane used for

stacking intermodal containers within the stacking areas of a container terminal

e-RTGC are used at container terminals and container storage yards to straddling

multiple lanes of railroad and container storage or when maximum storage

density in the container stack is desired

AMP is shorted for Alternative Marine Power and Itrsquos a facility which

provides the electric system in the land for ship which entry in the port The

facility can reduce emissions which ship get entrance in the port

AGV is a mobile robot that follows markers or wires in the floor or uses

vision or lasers They are most often used in industrial applications to move

materials around a manufacturing facility or a warehouse Automatic Guided

Vehicle systems work around-the-clock making continuous flow and just-in-time

delivery easier to achieve Application of the automatic guided vehicle has broade

33

ned during the late 20th century and they are no longer restricted to industrial

environments

The e-RTGC AMP and AGV are the new clean facilities and equipments in the

Green Port they donrsquot reduce the efficiency of handling cargo and they also

reduce the CO2 emission account

Green ship certification system if a ship utilizes clean and CO2 emission

reduction technology on the ship building adds equipment and management and

son on certification would be received And the port authority gives some

incentive and preferential treatment among 45 ports Such as a better schedule is

provided for green membership ship priority in handing cargo and discount on

entrance fee

Incentives on the new cleaning technology There are two expressions about

this measure one is that the port authority give a incentive to ship which have a

great utilization on the new cleaning technology and the other one is that

environment provide many incentives to the authority which utilize the new

cleaning technology in the port such as LED street lamp solar power cranes

Green flag The Green Flag incentive program was set up to encourage ships to

slow down in order to improve air quality The Green Flag program provides

approximately $2 million a year in discounts for vessel operators who slow their

ships to 12 knots (22kmh) or less within 20miles (32km) of the harbor

34

According to the Port the Green Flag program reduced air pollution by 600tons in

2007 and is expected to do better in 2008

All of Green ship certification system incentives on the new cleaning

technology and Green Flag are incentives provided for users of port and aimed at

reduce port rates and charges So the 3 measures belong to affect port rates and

charges

Eco-friendly transport means conversion Eco-friendly means of transport are

much accounted of green port for example railway discharge less GHG emission

than truck barge with a clean engine among the river and inshore canal

Joint distribution joint distribution is a collaborative system which port

provides among many logistics companies It can make the cargo handling speed

rapidly and reduce cargo storage time for CO2 emission reducing such as

refrigerated container In an addition it also makes the logistics companies

transport more efficient

Cost on amount of CO2 emission differenced from other port the cost on

amount of CO2 is included in the port cost The cost aims to reduce the CO2

emission directly

CO2 emission reduction policies compared with other traditional port Green

Port gives more cost discount and incentives but in an addition there are many

policies on CO2 emission restriction Such as aging trucks restrictions in inland

transport department ship entry speed reduced and fuel changed in the ship

35

department and so on Whether these restriction policies constrain port

development or not and the degree of these policies constrain port development

will be explain by the AHP results

Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors some ports in the

western countries are opened as a travel place for visitors so as to change the

polluted impress and raise the position in our heart

Cost on amount of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction policies and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors can affect the social

circumstance factor Whether these measures can or not improve the social

circumstance and port competitiveness we have to see the next calculation and

results

36

Chapter 4 The Green Port Competitiveness

Analysis

41 The Green Port Competitiveness Model by AHP

The AHP is one multi-criteria decision making method which has been

extensively applied to a variety of decision-making situations The multi-criteria

techniques are considered to be a promising framework for evaluation of

decision-making factors since they have the potential to take into account

conflicting multidimensional incommensurable and uncertain effects of

decisions explicitly

In order to apply the AHP method a hierarchical decision schema was

constructed by decomposing the decision problem into its decision elements

37

After that the importance or preferences of the decision elements are examined in

a pair-wise comparison to the elements in the hierarchy The parameters are

estimated using pair-wise comparisons between the importance of the attribute or

decision element in the function using data made by each responder Making

comparisons is a question of which of the two attributes is more import as well as

how much more important

Follow these theories the Green Port Competitiveness Model choose factors as

follow in port competitiveness factors part there are port facilities port rates and

charges inland connection social circumstance in Green Port construction part

there are e-RTGC AMP AGV green ship certification system green flag

incentives on the new cleaning technology eco-friendly transport means

conversion joint distribution CO2 emission reduction policies cost on amount of

CO2 emission beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

38

Figure 41 Green Port Competitiveness AHP model

Follow the Green Port Competitiveness AHP as shown we set a questionnaire

survey to many experts scholars working in logistics system area And we got 15

ones and 14 ones results are believable and integrated

42 Green Port Competitiveness Analysis

39

The key to construction of the factors which affects the port competitiveness

is to determine the conceptual model The selection of the factors directly affects

the evaluation of the result In order to ensure the accuracy objectivity and

practicality of evaluation results the following basic principles must be followed

when selecting factors systematic principles the principle of universal

comparability practical principle and goal-oriented principle In view of the

foregoing the competitiveness which affected by Green Port construction model

is made The analysis follows established principles of port competitiveness

evaluation taking into account the characteristics and functions of the port as well

as port facilities port services port rates and charges ship entrance inland

connection social circumstances and so on

(1) Port facilities

e-RTGC U11 AMP U12 AGV U13

(2) Port rates and charges

Green ship certification system U21 Incentives on the new clean

technology U22 Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

(3) Inland connection

Eco-friendly means of transport U31 Joint distribution U32

(4) Social circumstances

40

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41 CO2 emission reduction policies

U42 Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors U43

Table 421 Details of Level I and Level II values

Level I

indicators Symbol Level II indicators Symbol

Port facilities A1

e-RTGC U11

AMP U12

AGV U13

Port rates and

charges A2

Green ship certification system U21

Incentives on the new clean technology U22

Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

Inland

connection A3

Eco-friendly means of transport U31

Joint distribution U32

Social

circumstances A4

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41

CO2 emissions reduction policies U42

Beautiful environment construction in inner

harbors U43

41

I Determination of level I indicator weights

As the ports competitiveness evaluation indicators at this level are complex

and the elements are not easily quantified AHP is adopted to determine the

indicator weights with the basic steps as follows

(1) Establish a comparative judgment matrix The comparative judgment

matrix is obtained through comparing contributed proportion of multiple

indicators to the overall target by the judgment scale wherein the fuzzy

judgment number introduced is 1 3 5 7 and 9 and the reciprocal of

such number indicates the important degree of one element relatively to

another The results are shown in next table

Table 422 Comparison matrix of level I indicators

A1 A2 A3 A4

A1 1 15 13 3

A2 5 1 3 7

A3 3 13 1 5

A4 13 17 15 1

(2) Calculate the characteristic vector of the comparative judgment matrix

which refers to the weighted vector of the indicator The writer adopts

42

the geometric method to calculate the characteristic vector The

calculated result is as follows

ω=(012 0560 026 006)T λmax=418 It can be obtained from the table

RI=09 Wherein ω is the characteristic vector corresponding to the

maximum characteristic value λmax of the comparative judgment matrix

namely the weighted vector of the indicator RI is the average

consistency indicator as shown in following table

Table423 Average random consistency indicator RI

Matrix Order

RI

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

0 0 058 09 112 124 132 141

Matrix Order

RI

9 10 11 12 13 14 15

145 149 152 154 156 158 159

(3) Conduct consistency check on the comparative judgment matrix Adopt

the random consistency proportion CR to judge the consistency of the

comparative judgment matrix According to CI= (λmax -n)(n-1) and

CR=CIRI it can be obtained through calculation CR=007lt01 Thus

this comparative judgment matrix has a satisfactory consistency and the

indicator weight coefficient calculated through this matrix is acceptable

43

II Determination of level II indicator weights

The data at this level are the details of level Ⅰ indicator The judgment

matrix obtained through comparing multiple sub-indicators under Level Ⅰ

indicators is adopted to determine the weights of sub-indicators under each

indicator one by one The specific steps are as follows

(1) The experts score the weights within the given range To determine the

weights of several small indicators under the same big indicator it is

supposed that the score of small indicator ｋ under the indicator j made

by the expert i is Xijk wherein i=12n n is the total number of

experts ј=12m m is the total number of LevelⅡ indicator к

=12Oj Oj is the number of small indicators under the big indicator ј

іјк IJK LRC l I j k

(2) The credit rating of the expert і is l l =1 2 3 l =1 indicates this expert

is quite familiar with the evaluated contents l =2 indicator this expert is

44

with the evaluated contents l =3 indicates this expert is not quite familiar

with the evaluated contents yi1 is the=08 yi2 =05 and yi3=1

(3) The comprehensive evaluation score of small indicator l under the

indicator j is as follows

(4) The formula for normalization processing of indicator weights is as

follows and the absolute weight of the indicator set is marked as

q=(q1q2q11)

(5) Because of the same justification and principle we donrsquot give the detail

about the calculation The same with the level Ⅰ calculation we

manipulation data one by one and get 14 results And obtain the average

45

results by weighted average method The results detail as Table for the

final weights of Level-Ⅱ evaluation indicators

Above the calculation process and method are just one of data from the

questionable surveys In this study the final results are got from the

weighted average by the results of each questionable survey

The final results are shown as Table424

Table424 Indicator weights table of indicator system

Level I

indicators Weight LevelⅡ indicators

Relative

weight

Absolute

weight

Importance

percentage

Port Facilities

A1 02735

e-RTGC U11 05506 01506 1506

AMP U12 01648 00451 451

AGV U13 02826 00773 773

Port Rates and

Charges A2

02902

Green ship certification s

ystem U21 04724 01371 1371

Incentives on the new

clean technology U22 02871 00833 833

Green Flag (speed

reduction incentive)U23 02405 00698 698

Inland

connection A3

02865

Eco-friendly means of

transport U31 05942 01702 1702

Joint distribution U32 04058 01163 1163

Social

environmentA4 00863

Cost on amount of CO2

emission U41 03698 00319 319

CO2 emissions reduction

policies U42 02273 00196 196

Beautiful environment

construction in inner

harbors U43

04029 00348 348

46

III Case study

In the questionable survey we also got the mark of Green Port measures

evaluation value of many main ports such as Singapore Port Shanghai Port

Hongkong Port Busan Port LALB Port Rotterdam Port and Yocohama Port

The highest mark is 5 and lowest one is 1

Table425 Evaluation value of many main ports

Singapore

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

LALB

Port

Rotterdam

Port

Yocohama

Port

Port facilities 38000 36000 34000 38182 38000 42000 32000

Port rates and

charges 32000 36000 31000 35455 32000 39000 33000

Inland

connection 39000 34545 35000 29091 35000 45000 36000

Social

circumstance 42000 32727 41000 32000 38000 42727 36000

With the Green Port and Port competitiveness indicator weights results these

ports got the final evaluation value

47

Table426 Final evaluation value on main ports Green Port measures and

competitiveness

Rotterdam

Port

Singapore

Port

LALB

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

Yocohama

Port

394 345 330 330 319 318 317

43 Results Analysis

From the results table we can obtain the many results as following

① The main Green Port measures which are more important to improve port

competitiveness are Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system the indicator weights are 01702 01506 and

01371 among the 11 indicators

② In the Green Port construction Cost on amount of CO2 emission and CO2

emissions reduction policies are the restrictions indicators but the weight

of two indicators are not big 00319 and 00196 So effect on Green Port

construction to port competitiveness does have the weaken capacity but

not clearly strengthen more clearly Thus Green Port construction really

could improve the port competitiveness

48

③ In the case study traditional ports Rotterdam and Singapore Port give us

better examples on Green Port construction especially Rotterdam Port

④ Hongkong Busan and Yocohama Port all got a lower evaluation value

But in detail Hongkong and Yocohama Port got a lower on the port

facilities and rates and charges Busan Port got a higher on the port

facilities and rates and charges but a lower on the inland connection and

social circumstance

⑤ Shanghai Port doesnrsquot have Particular strength factors but the

comprehensive strength is not bad the same as LALB Port

49

Chapter 5 Conclusion

In this thesis the effects of Green Port construction for improving the port

competitiveness have been studied Under the definition of Green Port the

characteristics of Green Port and its effects has been shown by analysing the AHP

method which based on the questionary survey for Green Port specialists and port

officers

Follow the results of analysis on Green Port competitiveness AHP model

Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green ship certification system is

better for Green Port Construction welcome for shipping companies and citizens

who live around the port And in the analysis of Port competitiveness factors port

rates and charges always affects port competitiveness a lot As a trend inland

connection factor abstracts more attention of shipping companies

50

On the trend of port department each port should take a activity to adjust

strategy for improving its competitiveness Such as in the main ports evaluation

Busan port get a high value on port rates and charges and port facilities but as a

lower value on inland connection factor the final value is not as well as we look

forward In the evaluation of Singapore Port through it gets a lower value on rates

and charges higher value on inland connection and social circumstance causes the

final value are better So the Green Port Construction may be a trend in port

department

In the results of this thesis Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system are better solutions for Green Port Construction And

especially it can be verified that the port rates and charges always affects port

competitiveness Futhermore the investment for Green Port construction and its

effects have to be verified in the future

51

References

1 Hoyle B S and Smith J 1992 Transport and Development In Modern

transport geography edited by B S Hoyle R D Knowles (London Belhaven

Press)pp11-31

2 Beresford A K C De Souza A J R G and Pettit S J 2005 Stategic

development of liner shipping companies and terminal operators Ocean yearbook

19(Chicago 1L The University of Chicago Press) pp 732-750

3 Heaver T D 2002 Supply chain and logistics management implications for

liner shipping In The handbook of maritime economics and business edited by C

Grammenos (LondonLLP) pp 375-396

4 Park T E (2011) A Study on selection criteria of Green Port and evaluation of

major Korean port A masters thesis of graduate school of Incheon university

52

5 JeongBH (2009)Green port management policy directions in the green

growth era- The case of Gwangyang port in Republic of Korea Journal of Korea

Port Economic Association Vol25(3) p361-384

6 Lee J S Han N H(2009) A study on Green Port Revitalization According to

Air Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

7 Lee Y K Nan J W(2010)Green Logistics Policy Analysis and Implications

of Japan

8 Lee B S (2010)Tendency and Countermeasures on Green Logistics in Port

Logistics Company A masters thesis of graduate school of Korean Maritime

university

9 Lee J S (2009) A Study on Green Port Revitalization According to Air

Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

10 Zhang F Y Li Z Lu X J Yao X L(2008)Competitiveness of Inland

Ports Based on F-AHP

11 Port of Long Beach (2009) Green Port Policy wwwpolbcom

12 The port of Los Angeles wwwportoflosangelesorg

26

ship calls frequency and amount of fleet factors in the transport modes part In the

infrastructure part includes port facility equipments and so on

Port facilities rates and charges services inland situation and social

circumstance factors affect the port selection and competitiveness a lot from the

research until 1992 by Murphy And in Lirn and Pater research 2003-2004 the

new and detail factors are shown to us

We can clearly see the contents in next table

27

Table 311 Prevention literature research results

Influence factors

French

(1979)

Endogenous

port facilities port rate and charges calls frequency port services

port connection with inland

Exogenous

economic size of hinterland national economic situation trade

policy home and abroad situation

Willingale

(1982)

voyage distance economy size entrance to port and route port

facilities max ship entrance probability port operation rates and

charges port authority scale of port

Slack

(1985)

cost of inland transportation port proximity ship demurrage

multi-transport

Peter

(1990)

Endogenous

port facilities condition of facilities operation strategies

convenience to utilize

Exogenous

political situation social change economic factor stabilized labor

and capital

UNCTAD

(1992)

port facilities services location level of financial industry

information communication system social circumstances economic

stability

Murphy

(1992)

facilities situation appropriate pilotage max ship entrance

probability the capability of handling non-regular cargos whether to

provide information of ship nationality or not port services level

Lirn

(2003-2004)

physical and technologic facilities geopolitical location port

operation and management shipping and terminal cost

Peter

(2004)

Multi-modal Process

ship entrance rapid speed and accuracy shipper and shipping

companies reactive operation flexibility

Interface labor and capital

Transport modes ship calls frequency and amount of fleet factors

28

And there are many experts and scholars research for the influence factors to

port selection and competitiveness in Korea The specific content follows table5

Table 312 Literature research in Korean academia

Influence factors

Jeon Il-su (1992) location facilities charges service level (EDI) terminal operation

port authority

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

( 1993 )

location facilities throughput charges service operation

situation

Kim Hak-so

(1993)

export shipping amount of annual cost of each ton of cargo

marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km of

cargo loading time

import marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km

of cargo amount of liner ship

Yeo Gi-tae (1996) location facilities throughput charge service operation situation

Ha Dong-u amp

Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

location facilities service level logistics charges environment of

logistics service

Yeo Gi-tae (1999) location facilities throughput charges service

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

throughput quay length yard area GNP

Kum Jong-su

(2001)

distance between port and cargo site terminal facilities service

the capacity of multi-transport capacity of cargo handling

administrative service rates and charges of inland transport

congestion

Yeo Gi-tae (2002) location throughput facilities service level

Kim Jin-gu (2002) port facilities location cargo amount rates and charges services

29

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005)

voyage degree to attract cargo cargo handling cost amount of

handling cargo connection to inland service reliability location

berth availability quay length feeder network depth

transshipment volumes cargo security profitability

offing degree to attract cargo berth availability cargo handling

cost transshipment volumes

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005)

cargo handling amount port facilities location rates and charges

level of service

Heo Yun-su

(2005)

port facilities rates and charges services marketing geopolitics

location economic and social circumstance

Kim Geun-seop

(2007)

port services facilities cargo handling amount location cost

productivity factor global factor

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) rates and charges services port characteristics

Many experts and scholars make a research on port selection and

competitiveness recently But the factors selection criteria are difference

Nevertheless the main factors are facilities services cost and so on

Therefore port competitiveness factors which chose in this study are port

facilities port services port rates and charges and social circumstance

However the main factors are not the whole factors any more more and more

detail factors and characteristic factors appearance Port selection and

competitiveness factors have changed And the development content is introduced

in next part

30

32 Port Competitiveness Development Tree

As mentioned above port facilities port rates and charges and port location are

the basic factors in the port selection and competitiveness

From the following table we can discover that first one facilities rates and

charges and location are the most important factor in port selection and

competitiveness second one the importance of social circumstance turns larger

inland connection is necessary all the time

Table 321 Main factor in the Pretentious Research

31

port facilities rates and

charges

inland

connection

social

circumstance location

French (1979) radic radic radic

Wiliingale (1982) radic radic

Slack (1985) radic

Pater (1990) radic radic

UNCTAD (1992) radic radic radic

Murphy(1992) radic

Jeon Il-su (1992) radic radic radic

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

(1993)

radic radic radic

Kim Hak-so

(1993) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1996) radic radic radic

Ha Dong-u

amp Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1998) radic radic radic

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

radic

Kum Jong-su

(2001) radic radic radic radic

Kim Jin-gu(2002) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(2002) radic radic

Lirn(2003-2004) radic radic radic

Pater(2004) radic

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005) radic radic radic

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005) radic radic radic

Heo Yun-su

(2005) radic radic radic radic

Kim Geun-seop

(2007) radic radic radic radic

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) radic

32

33 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green

Port Construction

Following the research above Port facilities rates and charges inland

connection and social circumstance are chose in this study port selection and

competitiveness department

e-RTGC Electric rubber tired gantry crane is a mobile gantry crane used for

stacking intermodal containers within the stacking areas of a container terminal

e-RTGC are used at container terminals and container storage yards to straddling

multiple lanes of railroad and container storage or when maximum storage

density in the container stack is desired

AMP is shorted for Alternative Marine Power and Itrsquos a facility which

provides the electric system in the land for ship which entry in the port The

facility can reduce emissions which ship get entrance in the port

AGV is a mobile robot that follows markers or wires in the floor or uses

vision or lasers They are most often used in industrial applications to move

materials around a manufacturing facility or a warehouse Automatic Guided

Vehicle systems work around-the-clock making continuous flow and just-in-time

delivery easier to achieve Application of the automatic guided vehicle has broade

33

ned during the late 20th century and they are no longer restricted to industrial

environments

The e-RTGC AMP and AGV are the new clean facilities and equipments in the

Green Port they donrsquot reduce the efficiency of handling cargo and they also

reduce the CO2 emission account

Green ship certification system if a ship utilizes clean and CO2 emission

reduction technology on the ship building adds equipment and management and

son on certification would be received And the port authority gives some

incentive and preferential treatment among 45 ports Such as a better schedule is

provided for green membership ship priority in handing cargo and discount on

entrance fee

Incentives on the new cleaning technology There are two expressions about

this measure one is that the port authority give a incentive to ship which have a

great utilization on the new cleaning technology and the other one is that

environment provide many incentives to the authority which utilize the new

cleaning technology in the port such as LED street lamp solar power cranes

Green flag The Green Flag incentive program was set up to encourage ships to

slow down in order to improve air quality The Green Flag program provides

approximately $2 million a year in discounts for vessel operators who slow their

ships to 12 knots (22kmh) or less within 20miles (32km) of the harbor

34

According to the Port the Green Flag program reduced air pollution by 600tons in

2007 and is expected to do better in 2008

All of Green ship certification system incentives on the new cleaning

technology and Green Flag are incentives provided for users of port and aimed at

reduce port rates and charges So the 3 measures belong to affect port rates and

charges

Eco-friendly transport means conversion Eco-friendly means of transport are

much accounted of green port for example railway discharge less GHG emission

than truck barge with a clean engine among the river and inshore canal

Joint distribution joint distribution is a collaborative system which port

provides among many logistics companies It can make the cargo handling speed

rapidly and reduce cargo storage time for CO2 emission reducing such as

refrigerated container In an addition it also makes the logistics companies

transport more efficient

Cost on amount of CO2 emission differenced from other port the cost on

amount of CO2 is included in the port cost The cost aims to reduce the CO2

emission directly

CO2 emission reduction policies compared with other traditional port Green

Port gives more cost discount and incentives but in an addition there are many

policies on CO2 emission restriction Such as aging trucks restrictions in inland

transport department ship entry speed reduced and fuel changed in the ship

35

department and so on Whether these restriction policies constrain port

development or not and the degree of these policies constrain port development

will be explain by the AHP results

Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors some ports in the

western countries are opened as a travel place for visitors so as to change the

polluted impress and raise the position in our heart

Cost on amount of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction policies and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors can affect the social

circumstance factor Whether these measures can or not improve the social

circumstance and port competitiveness we have to see the next calculation and

results

36

Chapter 4 The Green Port Competitiveness

Analysis

41 The Green Port Competitiveness Model by AHP

The AHP is one multi-criteria decision making method which has been

extensively applied to a variety of decision-making situations The multi-criteria

techniques are considered to be a promising framework for evaluation of

decision-making factors since they have the potential to take into account

conflicting multidimensional incommensurable and uncertain effects of

decisions explicitly

In order to apply the AHP method a hierarchical decision schema was

constructed by decomposing the decision problem into its decision elements

37

After that the importance or preferences of the decision elements are examined in

a pair-wise comparison to the elements in the hierarchy The parameters are

estimated using pair-wise comparisons between the importance of the attribute or

decision element in the function using data made by each responder Making

comparisons is a question of which of the two attributes is more import as well as

how much more important

Follow these theories the Green Port Competitiveness Model choose factors as

follow in port competitiveness factors part there are port facilities port rates and

charges inland connection social circumstance in Green Port construction part

there are e-RTGC AMP AGV green ship certification system green flag

incentives on the new cleaning technology eco-friendly transport means

conversion joint distribution CO2 emission reduction policies cost on amount of

CO2 emission beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

38

Figure 41 Green Port Competitiveness AHP model

Follow the Green Port Competitiveness AHP as shown we set a questionnaire

survey to many experts scholars working in logistics system area And we got 15

ones and 14 ones results are believable and integrated

42 Green Port Competitiveness Analysis

39

The key to construction of the factors which affects the port competitiveness

is to determine the conceptual model The selection of the factors directly affects

the evaluation of the result In order to ensure the accuracy objectivity and

practicality of evaluation results the following basic principles must be followed

when selecting factors systematic principles the principle of universal

comparability practical principle and goal-oriented principle In view of the

foregoing the competitiveness which affected by Green Port construction model

is made The analysis follows established principles of port competitiveness

evaluation taking into account the characteristics and functions of the port as well

as port facilities port services port rates and charges ship entrance inland

connection social circumstances and so on

(1) Port facilities

e-RTGC U11 AMP U12 AGV U13

(2) Port rates and charges

Green ship certification system U21 Incentives on the new clean

technology U22 Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

(3) Inland connection

Eco-friendly means of transport U31 Joint distribution U32

(4) Social circumstances

40

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41 CO2 emission reduction policies

U42 Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors U43

Table 421 Details of Level I and Level II values

Level I

indicators Symbol Level II indicators Symbol

Port facilities A1

e-RTGC U11

AMP U12

AGV U13

Port rates and

charges A2

Green ship certification system U21

Incentives on the new clean technology U22

Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

Inland

connection A3

Eco-friendly means of transport U31

Joint distribution U32

Social

circumstances A4

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41

CO2 emissions reduction policies U42

Beautiful environment construction in inner

harbors U43

41

I Determination of level I indicator weights

As the ports competitiveness evaluation indicators at this level are complex

and the elements are not easily quantified AHP is adopted to determine the

indicator weights with the basic steps as follows

(1) Establish a comparative judgment matrix The comparative judgment

matrix is obtained through comparing contributed proportion of multiple

indicators to the overall target by the judgment scale wherein the fuzzy

judgment number introduced is 1 3 5 7 and 9 and the reciprocal of

such number indicates the important degree of one element relatively to

another The results are shown in next table

Table 422 Comparison matrix of level I indicators

A1 A2 A3 A4

A1 1 15 13 3

A2 5 1 3 7

A3 3 13 1 5

A4 13 17 15 1

(2) Calculate the characteristic vector of the comparative judgment matrix

which refers to the weighted vector of the indicator The writer adopts

42

the geometric method to calculate the characteristic vector The

calculated result is as follows

ω=(012 0560 026 006)T λmax=418 It can be obtained from the table

RI=09 Wherein ω is the characteristic vector corresponding to the

maximum characteristic value λmax of the comparative judgment matrix

namely the weighted vector of the indicator RI is the average

consistency indicator as shown in following table

Table423 Average random consistency indicator RI

Matrix Order

RI

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

0 0 058 09 112 124 132 141

Matrix Order

RI

9 10 11 12 13 14 15

145 149 152 154 156 158 159

(3) Conduct consistency check on the comparative judgment matrix Adopt

the random consistency proportion CR to judge the consistency of the

comparative judgment matrix According to CI= (λmax -n)(n-1) and

CR=CIRI it can be obtained through calculation CR=007lt01 Thus

this comparative judgment matrix has a satisfactory consistency and the

indicator weight coefficient calculated through this matrix is acceptable

43

II Determination of level II indicator weights

The data at this level are the details of level Ⅰ indicator The judgment

matrix obtained through comparing multiple sub-indicators under Level Ⅰ

indicators is adopted to determine the weights of sub-indicators under each

indicator one by one The specific steps are as follows

(1) The experts score the weights within the given range To determine the

weights of several small indicators under the same big indicator it is

supposed that the score of small indicator ｋ under the indicator j made

by the expert i is Xijk wherein i=12n n is the total number of

experts ј=12m m is the total number of LevelⅡ indicator к

=12Oj Oj is the number of small indicators under the big indicator ј

іјк IJK LRC l I j k

(2) The credit rating of the expert і is l l =1 2 3 l =1 indicates this expert

is quite familiar with the evaluated contents l =2 indicator this expert is

44

with the evaluated contents l =3 indicates this expert is not quite familiar

with the evaluated contents yi1 is the=08 yi2 =05 and yi3=1

(3) The comprehensive evaluation score of small indicator l under the

indicator j is as follows

(4) The formula for normalization processing of indicator weights is as

follows and the absolute weight of the indicator set is marked as

q=(q1q2q11)

(5) Because of the same justification and principle we donrsquot give the detail

about the calculation The same with the level Ⅰ calculation we

manipulation data one by one and get 14 results And obtain the average

45

results by weighted average method The results detail as Table for the

final weights of Level-Ⅱ evaluation indicators

Above the calculation process and method are just one of data from the

questionable surveys In this study the final results are got from the

weighted average by the results of each questionable survey

The final results are shown as Table424

Table424 Indicator weights table of indicator system

Level I

indicators Weight LevelⅡ indicators

Relative

weight

Absolute

weight

Importance

percentage

Port Facilities

A1 02735

e-RTGC U11 05506 01506 1506

AMP U12 01648 00451 451

AGV U13 02826 00773 773

Port Rates and

Charges A2

02902

Green ship certification s

ystem U21 04724 01371 1371

Incentives on the new

clean technology U22 02871 00833 833

Green Flag (speed

reduction incentive)U23 02405 00698 698

Inland

connection A3

02865

Eco-friendly means of

transport U31 05942 01702 1702

Joint distribution U32 04058 01163 1163

Social

environmentA4 00863

Cost on amount of CO2

emission U41 03698 00319 319

CO2 emissions reduction

policies U42 02273 00196 196

Beautiful environment

construction in inner

harbors U43

04029 00348 348

46

III Case study

In the questionable survey we also got the mark of Green Port measures

evaluation value of many main ports such as Singapore Port Shanghai Port

Hongkong Port Busan Port LALB Port Rotterdam Port and Yocohama Port

The highest mark is 5 and lowest one is 1

Table425 Evaluation value of many main ports

Singapore

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

LALB

Port

Rotterdam

Port

Yocohama

Port

Port facilities 38000 36000 34000 38182 38000 42000 32000

Port rates and

charges 32000 36000 31000 35455 32000 39000 33000

Inland

connection 39000 34545 35000 29091 35000 45000 36000

Social

circumstance 42000 32727 41000 32000 38000 42727 36000

With the Green Port and Port competitiveness indicator weights results these

ports got the final evaluation value

47

Table426 Final evaluation value on main ports Green Port measures and

competitiveness

Rotterdam

Port

Singapore

Port

LALB

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

Yocohama

Port

394 345 330 330 319 318 317

43 Results Analysis

From the results table we can obtain the many results as following

① The main Green Port measures which are more important to improve port

competitiveness are Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system the indicator weights are 01702 01506 and

01371 among the 11 indicators

② In the Green Port construction Cost on amount of CO2 emission and CO2

emissions reduction policies are the restrictions indicators but the weight

of two indicators are not big 00319 and 00196 So effect on Green Port

construction to port competitiveness does have the weaken capacity but

not clearly strengthen more clearly Thus Green Port construction really

could improve the port competitiveness

48

③ In the case study traditional ports Rotterdam and Singapore Port give us

better examples on Green Port construction especially Rotterdam Port

④ Hongkong Busan and Yocohama Port all got a lower evaluation value

But in detail Hongkong and Yocohama Port got a lower on the port

facilities and rates and charges Busan Port got a higher on the port

facilities and rates and charges but a lower on the inland connection and

social circumstance

⑤ Shanghai Port doesnrsquot have Particular strength factors but the

comprehensive strength is not bad the same as LALB Port

49

Chapter 5 Conclusion

In this thesis the effects of Green Port construction for improving the port

competitiveness have been studied Under the definition of Green Port the

characteristics of Green Port and its effects has been shown by analysing the AHP

method which based on the questionary survey for Green Port specialists and port

officers

Follow the results of analysis on Green Port competitiveness AHP model

Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green ship certification system is

better for Green Port Construction welcome for shipping companies and citizens

who live around the port And in the analysis of Port competitiveness factors port

rates and charges always affects port competitiveness a lot As a trend inland

connection factor abstracts more attention of shipping companies

50

On the trend of port department each port should take a activity to adjust

strategy for improving its competitiveness Such as in the main ports evaluation

Busan port get a high value on port rates and charges and port facilities but as a

lower value on inland connection factor the final value is not as well as we look

forward In the evaluation of Singapore Port through it gets a lower value on rates

and charges higher value on inland connection and social circumstance causes the

final value are better So the Green Port Construction may be a trend in port

department

In the results of this thesis Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system are better solutions for Green Port Construction And

especially it can be verified that the port rates and charges always affects port

competitiveness Futhermore the investment for Green Port construction and its

effects have to be verified in the future

51

References

1 Hoyle B S and Smith J 1992 Transport and Development In Modern

transport geography edited by B S Hoyle R D Knowles (London Belhaven

Press)pp11-31

2 Beresford A K C De Souza A J R G and Pettit S J 2005 Stategic

development of liner shipping companies and terminal operators Ocean yearbook

19(Chicago 1L The University of Chicago Press) pp 732-750

3 Heaver T D 2002 Supply chain and logistics management implications for

liner shipping In The handbook of maritime economics and business edited by C

Grammenos (LondonLLP) pp 375-396

4 Park T E (2011) A Study on selection criteria of Green Port and evaluation of

major Korean port A masters thesis of graduate school of Incheon university

52

5 JeongBH (2009)Green port management policy directions in the green

growth era- The case of Gwangyang port in Republic of Korea Journal of Korea

Port Economic Association Vol25(3) p361-384

6 Lee J S Han N H(2009) A study on Green Port Revitalization According to

Air Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

7 Lee Y K Nan J W(2010)Green Logistics Policy Analysis and Implications

of Japan

8 Lee B S (2010)Tendency and Countermeasures on Green Logistics in Port

Logistics Company A masters thesis of graduate school of Korean Maritime

university

9 Lee J S (2009) A Study on Green Port Revitalization According to Air

Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

10 Zhang F Y Li Z Lu X J Yao X L(2008)Competitiveness of Inland

Ports Based on F-AHP

11 Port of Long Beach (2009) Green Port Policy wwwpolbcom

12 The port of Los Angeles wwwportoflosangelesorg

27

Table 311 Prevention literature research results

Influence factors

French

(1979)

Endogenous

port facilities port rate and charges calls frequency port services

port connection with inland

Exogenous

economic size of hinterland national economic situation trade

policy home and abroad situation

Willingale

(1982)

voyage distance economy size entrance to port and route port

facilities max ship entrance probability port operation rates and

charges port authority scale of port

Slack

(1985)

cost of inland transportation port proximity ship demurrage

multi-transport

Peter

(1990)

Endogenous

port facilities condition of facilities operation strategies

convenience to utilize

Exogenous

political situation social change economic factor stabilized labor

and capital

UNCTAD

(1992)

port facilities services location level of financial industry

information communication system social circumstances economic

stability

Murphy

(1992)

facilities situation appropriate pilotage max ship entrance

probability the capability of handling non-regular cargos whether to

provide information of ship nationality or not port services level

Lirn

(2003-2004)

physical and technologic facilities geopolitical location port

operation and management shipping and terminal cost

Peter

(2004)

Multi-modal Process

ship entrance rapid speed and accuracy shipper and shipping

companies reactive operation flexibility

Interface labor and capital

Transport modes ship calls frequency and amount of fleet factors

28

And there are many experts and scholars research for the influence factors to

port selection and competitiveness in Korea The specific content follows table5

Table 312 Literature research in Korean academia

Influence factors

Jeon Il-su (1992) location facilities charges service level (EDI) terminal operation

port authority

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

( 1993 )

location facilities throughput charges service operation

situation

Kim Hak-so

(1993)

export shipping amount of annual cost of each ton of cargo

marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km of

cargo loading time

import marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km

of cargo amount of liner ship

Yeo Gi-tae (1996) location facilities throughput charge service operation situation

Ha Dong-u amp

Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

location facilities service level logistics charges environment of

logistics service

Yeo Gi-tae (1999) location facilities throughput charges service

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

throughput quay length yard area GNP

Kum Jong-su

(2001)

distance between port and cargo site terminal facilities service

the capacity of multi-transport capacity of cargo handling

administrative service rates and charges of inland transport

congestion

Yeo Gi-tae (2002) location throughput facilities service level

Kim Jin-gu (2002) port facilities location cargo amount rates and charges services

29

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005)

voyage degree to attract cargo cargo handling cost amount of

handling cargo connection to inland service reliability location

berth availability quay length feeder network depth

transshipment volumes cargo security profitability

offing degree to attract cargo berth availability cargo handling

cost transshipment volumes

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005)

cargo handling amount port facilities location rates and charges

level of service

Heo Yun-su

(2005)

port facilities rates and charges services marketing geopolitics

location economic and social circumstance

Kim Geun-seop

(2007)

port services facilities cargo handling amount location cost

productivity factor global factor

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) rates and charges services port characteristics

Many experts and scholars make a research on port selection and

competitiveness recently But the factors selection criteria are difference

Nevertheless the main factors are facilities services cost and so on

Therefore port competitiveness factors which chose in this study are port

facilities port services port rates and charges and social circumstance

However the main factors are not the whole factors any more more and more

detail factors and characteristic factors appearance Port selection and

competitiveness factors have changed And the development content is introduced

in next part

30

32 Port Competitiveness Development Tree

As mentioned above port facilities port rates and charges and port location are

the basic factors in the port selection and competitiveness

From the following table we can discover that first one facilities rates and

charges and location are the most important factor in port selection and

competitiveness second one the importance of social circumstance turns larger

inland connection is necessary all the time

Table 321 Main factor in the Pretentious Research

31

port facilities rates and

charges

inland

connection

social

circumstance location

French (1979) radic radic radic

Wiliingale (1982) radic radic

Slack (1985) radic

Pater (1990) radic radic

UNCTAD (1992) radic radic radic

Murphy(1992) radic

Jeon Il-su (1992) radic radic radic

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

(1993)

radic radic radic

Kim Hak-so

(1993) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1996) radic radic radic

Ha Dong-u

amp Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1998) radic radic radic

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

radic

Kum Jong-su

(2001) radic radic radic radic

Kim Jin-gu(2002) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(2002) radic radic

Lirn(2003-2004) radic radic radic

Pater(2004) radic

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005) radic radic radic

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005) radic radic radic

Heo Yun-su

(2005) radic radic radic radic

Kim Geun-seop

(2007) radic radic radic radic

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) radic

32

33 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green

Port Construction

Following the research above Port facilities rates and charges inland

connection and social circumstance are chose in this study port selection and

competitiveness department

e-RTGC Electric rubber tired gantry crane is a mobile gantry crane used for

stacking intermodal containers within the stacking areas of a container terminal

e-RTGC are used at container terminals and container storage yards to straddling

multiple lanes of railroad and container storage or when maximum storage

density in the container stack is desired

AMP is shorted for Alternative Marine Power and Itrsquos a facility which

provides the electric system in the land for ship which entry in the port The

facility can reduce emissions which ship get entrance in the port

AGV is a mobile robot that follows markers or wires in the floor or uses

vision or lasers They are most often used in industrial applications to move

materials around a manufacturing facility or a warehouse Automatic Guided

Vehicle systems work around-the-clock making continuous flow and just-in-time

delivery easier to achieve Application of the automatic guided vehicle has broade

33

ned during the late 20th century and they are no longer restricted to industrial

environments

The e-RTGC AMP and AGV are the new clean facilities and equipments in the

Green Port they donrsquot reduce the efficiency of handling cargo and they also

reduce the CO2 emission account

Green ship certification system if a ship utilizes clean and CO2 emission

reduction technology on the ship building adds equipment and management and

son on certification would be received And the port authority gives some

incentive and preferential treatment among 45 ports Such as a better schedule is

provided for green membership ship priority in handing cargo and discount on

entrance fee

Incentives on the new cleaning technology There are two expressions about

this measure one is that the port authority give a incentive to ship which have a

great utilization on the new cleaning technology and the other one is that

environment provide many incentives to the authority which utilize the new

cleaning technology in the port such as LED street lamp solar power cranes

Green flag The Green Flag incentive program was set up to encourage ships to

slow down in order to improve air quality The Green Flag program provides

approximately $2 million a year in discounts for vessel operators who slow their

ships to 12 knots (22kmh) or less within 20miles (32km) of the harbor

34

According to the Port the Green Flag program reduced air pollution by 600tons in

2007 and is expected to do better in 2008

All of Green ship certification system incentives on the new cleaning

technology and Green Flag are incentives provided for users of port and aimed at

reduce port rates and charges So the 3 measures belong to affect port rates and

charges

Eco-friendly transport means conversion Eco-friendly means of transport are

much accounted of green port for example railway discharge less GHG emission

than truck barge with a clean engine among the river and inshore canal

Joint distribution joint distribution is a collaborative system which port

provides among many logistics companies It can make the cargo handling speed

rapidly and reduce cargo storage time for CO2 emission reducing such as

refrigerated container In an addition it also makes the logistics companies

transport more efficient

Cost on amount of CO2 emission differenced from other port the cost on

amount of CO2 is included in the port cost The cost aims to reduce the CO2

emission directly

CO2 emission reduction policies compared with other traditional port Green

Port gives more cost discount and incentives but in an addition there are many

policies on CO2 emission restriction Such as aging trucks restrictions in inland

transport department ship entry speed reduced and fuel changed in the ship

35

department and so on Whether these restriction policies constrain port

development or not and the degree of these policies constrain port development

will be explain by the AHP results

Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors some ports in the

western countries are opened as a travel place for visitors so as to change the

polluted impress and raise the position in our heart

Cost on amount of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction policies and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors can affect the social

circumstance factor Whether these measures can or not improve the social

circumstance and port competitiveness we have to see the next calculation and

results

36

Chapter 4 The Green Port Competitiveness

Analysis

41 The Green Port Competitiveness Model by AHP

The AHP is one multi-criteria decision making method which has been

extensively applied to a variety of decision-making situations The multi-criteria

techniques are considered to be a promising framework for evaluation of

decision-making factors since they have the potential to take into account

conflicting multidimensional incommensurable and uncertain effects of

decisions explicitly

In order to apply the AHP method a hierarchical decision schema was

constructed by decomposing the decision problem into its decision elements

37

After that the importance or preferences of the decision elements are examined in

a pair-wise comparison to the elements in the hierarchy The parameters are

estimated using pair-wise comparisons between the importance of the attribute or

decision element in the function using data made by each responder Making

comparisons is a question of which of the two attributes is more import as well as

how much more important

Follow these theories the Green Port Competitiveness Model choose factors as

follow in port competitiveness factors part there are port facilities port rates and

charges inland connection social circumstance in Green Port construction part

there are e-RTGC AMP AGV green ship certification system green flag

incentives on the new cleaning technology eco-friendly transport means

conversion joint distribution CO2 emission reduction policies cost on amount of

CO2 emission beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

38

Figure 41 Green Port Competitiveness AHP model

Follow the Green Port Competitiveness AHP as shown we set a questionnaire

survey to many experts scholars working in logistics system area And we got 15

ones and 14 ones results are believable and integrated

42 Green Port Competitiveness Analysis

39

The key to construction of the factors which affects the port competitiveness

is to determine the conceptual model The selection of the factors directly affects

the evaluation of the result In order to ensure the accuracy objectivity and

practicality of evaluation results the following basic principles must be followed

when selecting factors systematic principles the principle of universal

comparability practical principle and goal-oriented principle In view of the

foregoing the competitiveness which affected by Green Port construction model

is made The analysis follows established principles of port competitiveness

evaluation taking into account the characteristics and functions of the port as well

as port facilities port services port rates and charges ship entrance inland

connection social circumstances and so on

(1) Port facilities

e-RTGC U11 AMP U12 AGV U13

(2) Port rates and charges

Green ship certification system U21 Incentives on the new clean

technology U22 Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

(3) Inland connection

Eco-friendly means of transport U31 Joint distribution U32

(4) Social circumstances

40

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41 CO2 emission reduction policies

U42 Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors U43

Table 421 Details of Level I and Level II values

Level I

indicators Symbol Level II indicators Symbol

Port facilities A1

e-RTGC U11

AMP U12

AGV U13

Port rates and

charges A2

Green ship certification system U21

Incentives on the new clean technology U22

Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

Inland

connection A3

Eco-friendly means of transport U31

Joint distribution U32

Social

circumstances A4

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41

CO2 emissions reduction policies U42

Beautiful environment construction in inner

harbors U43

41

I Determination of level I indicator weights

As the ports competitiveness evaluation indicators at this level are complex

and the elements are not easily quantified AHP is adopted to determine the

indicator weights with the basic steps as follows

(1) Establish a comparative judgment matrix The comparative judgment

matrix is obtained through comparing contributed proportion of multiple

indicators to the overall target by the judgment scale wherein the fuzzy

judgment number introduced is 1 3 5 7 and 9 and the reciprocal of

such number indicates the important degree of one element relatively to

another The results are shown in next table

Table 422 Comparison matrix of level I indicators

A1 A2 A3 A4

A1 1 15 13 3

A2 5 1 3 7

A3 3 13 1 5

A4 13 17 15 1

(2) Calculate the characteristic vector of the comparative judgment matrix

which refers to the weighted vector of the indicator The writer adopts

42

the geometric method to calculate the characteristic vector The

calculated result is as follows

ω=(012 0560 026 006)T λmax=418 It can be obtained from the table

RI=09 Wherein ω is the characteristic vector corresponding to the

maximum characteristic value λmax of the comparative judgment matrix

namely the weighted vector of the indicator RI is the average

consistency indicator as shown in following table

Table423 Average random consistency indicator RI

Matrix Order

RI

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

0 0 058 09 112 124 132 141

Matrix Order

RI

9 10 11 12 13 14 15

145 149 152 154 156 158 159

(3) Conduct consistency check on the comparative judgment matrix Adopt

the random consistency proportion CR to judge the consistency of the

comparative judgment matrix According to CI= (λmax -n)(n-1) and

CR=CIRI it can be obtained through calculation CR=007lt01 Thus

this comparative judgment matrix has a satisfactory consistency and the

indicator weight coefficient calculated through this matrix is acceptable

43

II Determination of level II indicator weights

The data at this level are the details of level Ⅰ indicator The judgment

matrix obtained through comparing multiple sub-indicators under Level Ⅰ

indicators is adopted to determine the weights of sub-indicators under each

indicator one by one The specific steps are as follows

(1) The experts score the weights within the given range To determine the

weights of several small indicators under the same big indicator it is

supposed that the score of small indicator ｋ under the indicator j made

by the expert i is Xijk wherein i=12n n is the total number of

experts ј=12m m is the total number of LevelⅡ indicator к

=12Oj Oj is the number of small indicators under the big indicator ј

іјк IJK LRC l I j k

(2) The credit rating of the expert і is l l =1 2 3 l =1 indicates this expert

is quite familiar with the evaluated contents l =2 indicator this expert is

44

with the evaluated contents l =3 indicates this expert is not quite familiar

with the evaluated contents yi1 is the=08 yi2 =05 and yi3=1

(3) The comprehensive evaluation score of small indicator l under the

indicator j is as follows

(4) The formula for normalization processing of indicator weights is as

follows and the absolute weight of the indicator set is marked as

q=(q1q2q11)

(5) Because of the same justification and principle we donrsquot give the detail

about the calculation The same with the level Ⅰ calculation we

manipulation data one by one and get 14 results And obtain the average

45

results by weighted average method The results detail as Table for the

final weights of Level-Ⅱ evaluation indicators

Above the calculation process and method are just one of data from the

questionable surveys In this study the final results are got from the

weighted average by the results of each questionable survey

The final results are shown as Table424

Table424 Indicator weights table of indicator system

Level I

indicators Weight LevelⅡ indicators

Relative

weight

Absolute

weight

Importance

percentage

Port Facilities

A1 02735

e-RTGC U11 05506 01506 1506

AMP U12 01648 00451 451

AGV U13 02826 00773 773

Port Rates and

Charges A2

02902

Green ship certification s

ystem U21 04724 01371 1371

Incentives on the new

clean technology U22 02871 00833 833

Green Flag (speed

reduction incentive)U23 02405 00698 698

Inland

connection A3

02865

Eco-friendly means of

transport U31 05942 01702 1702

Joint distribution U32 04058 01163 1163

Social

environmentA4 00863

Cost on amount of CO2

emission U41 03698 00319 319

CO2 emissions reduction

policies U42 02273 00196 196

Beautiful environment

construction in inner

harbors U43

04029 00348 348

46

III Case study

In the questionable survey we also got the mark of Green Port measures

evaluation value of many main ports such as Singapore Port Shanghai Port

Hongkong Port Busan Port LALB Port Rotterdam Port and Yocohama Port

The highest mark is 5 and lowest one is 1

Table425 Evaluation value of many main ports

Singapore

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

LALB

Port

Rotterdam

Port

Yocohama

Port

Port facilities 38000 36000 34000 38182 38000 42000 32000

Port rates and

charges 32000 36000 31000 35455 32000 39000 33000

Inland

connection 39000 34545 35000 29091 35000 45000 36000

Social

circumstance 42000 32727 41000 32000 38000 42727 36000

With the Green Port and Port competitiveness indicator weights results these

ports got the final evaluation value

47

Table426 Final evaluation value on main ports Green Port measures and

competitiveness

Rotterdam

Port

Singapore

Port

LALB

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

Yocohama

Port

394 345 330 330 319 318 317

43 Results Analysis

From the results table we can obtain the many results as following

① The main Green Port measures which are more important to improve port

competitiveness are Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system the indicator weights are 01702 01506 and

01371 among the 11 indicators

② In the Green Port construction Cost on amount of CO2 emission and CO2

emissions reduction policies are the restrictions indicators but the weight

of two indicators are not big 00319 and 00196 So effect on Green Port

construction to port competitiveness does have the weaken capacity but

not clearly strengthen more clearly Thus Green Port construction really

could improve the port competitiveness

48

③ In the case study traditional ports Rotterdam and Singapore Port give us

better examples on Green Port construction especially Rotterdam Port

④ Hongkong Busan and Yocohama Port all got a lower evaluation value

But in detail Hongkong and Yocohama Port got a lower on the port

facilities and rates and charges Busan Port got a higher on the port

facilities and rates and charges but a lower on the inland connection and

social circumstance

⑤ Shanghai Port doesnrsquot have Particular strength factors but the

comprehensive strength is not bad the same as LALB Port

49

Chapter 5 Conclusion

In this thesis the effects of Green Port construction for improving the port

competitiveness have been studied Under the definition of Green Port the

characteristics of Green Port and its effects has been shown by analysing the AHP

method which based on the questionary survey for Green Port specialists and port

officers

Follow the results of analysis on Green Port competitiveness AHP model

Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green ship certification system is

better for Green Port Construction welcome for shipping companies and citizens

who live around the port And in the analysis of Port competitiveness factors port

rates and charges always affects port competitiveness a lot As a trend inland

connection factor abstracts more attention of shipping companies

50

On the trend of port department each port should take a activity to adjust

strategy for improving its competitiveness Such as in the main ports evaluation

Busan port get a high value on port rates and charges and port facilities but as a

lower value on inland connection factor the final value is not as well as we look

forward In the evaluation of Singapore Port through it gets a lower value on rates

and charges higher value on inland connection and social circumstance causes the

final value are better So the Green Port Construction may be a trend in port

department

In the results of this thesis Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system are better solutions for Green Port Construction And

especially it can be verified that the port rates and charges always affects port

competitiveness Futhermore the investment for Green Port construction and its

effects have to be verified in the future

51

References

1 Hoyle B S and Smith J 1992 Transport and Development In Modern

transport geography edited by B S Hoyle R D Knowles (London Belhaven

Press)pp11-31

2 Beresford A K C De Souza A J R G and Pettit S J 2005 Stategic

development of liner shipping companies and terminal operators Ocean yearbook

19(Chicago 1L The University of Chicago Press) pp 732-750

3 Heaver T D 2002 Supply chain and logistics management implications for

liner shipping In The handbook of maritime economics and business edited by C

Grammenos (LondonLLP) pp 375-396

4 Park T E (2011) A Study on selection criteria of Green Port and evaluation of

major Korean port A masters thesis of graduate school of Incheon university

52

5 JeongBH (2009)Green port management policy directions in the green

growth era- The case of Gwangyang port in Republic of Korea Journal of Korea

Port Economic Association Vol25(3) p361-384

6 Lee J S Han N H(2009) A study on Green Port Revitalization According to

Air Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

7 Lee Y K Nan J W(2010)Green Logistics Policy Analysis and Implications

of Japan

8 Lee B S (2010)Tendency and Countermeasures on Green Logistics in Port

Logistics Company A masters thesis of graduate school of Korean Maritime

university

9 Lee J S (2009) A Study on Green Port Revitalization According to Air

Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

10 Zhang F Y Li Z Lu X J Yao X L(2008)Competitiveness of Inland

Ports Based on F-AHP

11 Port of Long Beach (2009) Green Port Policy wwwpolbcom

12 The port of Los Angeles wwwportoflosangelesorg

28

And there are many experts and scholars research for the influence factors to

port selection and competitiveness in Korea The specific content follows table5

Table 312 Literature research in Korean academia

Influence factors

Jeon Il-su (1992) location facilities charges service level (EDI) terminal operation

port authority

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

( 1993 )

location facilities throughput charges service operation

situation

Kim Hak-so

(1993)

export shipping amount of annual cost of each ton of cargo

marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km of

cargo loading time

import marine transport distance inland transport cost of each km

of cargo amount of liner ship

Yeo Gi-tae (1996) location facilities throughput charge service operation situation

Ha Dong-u amp

Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

location facilities service level logistics charges environment of

logistics service

Yeo Gi-tae (1999) location facilities throughput charges service

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

throughput quay length yard area GNP

Kum Jong-su

(2001)

distance between port and cargo site terminal facilities service

the capacity of multi-transport capacity of cargo handling

administrative service rates and charges of inland transport

congestion

Yeo Gi-tae (2002) location throughput facilities service level

Kim Jin-gu (2002) port facilities location cargo amount rates and charges services

29

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005)

voyage degree to attract cargo cargo handling cost amount of

handling cargo connection to inland service reliability location

berth availability quay length feeder network depth

transshipment volumes cargo security profitability

offing degree to attract cargo berth availability cargo handling

cost transshipment volumes

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005)

cargo handling amount port facilities location rates and charges

level of service

Heo Yun-su

(2005)

port facilities rates and charges services marketing geopolitics

location economic and social circumstance

Kim Geun-seop

(2007)

port services facilities cargo handling amount location cost

productivity factor global factor

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) rates and charges services port characteristics

Many experts and scholars make a research on port selection and

competitiveness recently But the factors selection criteria are difference

Nevertheless the main factors are facilities services cost and so on

Therefore port competitiveness factors which chose in this study are port

facilities port services port rates and charges and social circumstance

However the main factors are not the whole factors any more more and more

detail factors and characteristic factors appearance Port selection and

competitiveness factors have changed And the development content is introduced

in next part

30

32 Port Competitiveness Development Tree

As mentioned above port facilities port rates and charges and port location are

the basic factors in the port selection and competitiveness

From the following table we can discover that first one facilities rates and

charges and location are the most important factor in port selection and

competitiveness second one the importance of social circumstance turns larger

inland connection is necessary all the time

Table 321 Main factor in the Pretentious Research

31

port facilities rates and

charges

inland

connection

social

circumstance location

French (1979) radic radic radic

Wiliingale (1982) radic radic

Slack (1985) radic

Pater (1990) radic radic

UNCTAD (1992) radic radic radic

Murphy(1992) radic

Jeon Il-su (1992) radic radic radic

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

(1993)

radic radic radic

Kim Hak-so

(1993) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1996) radic radic radic

Ha Dong-u

amp Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1998) radic radic radic

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

radic

Kum Jong-su

(2001) radic radic radic radic

Kim Jin-gu(2002) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(2002) radic radic

Lirn(2003-2004) radic radic radic

Pater(2004) radic

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005) radic radic radic

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005) radic radic radic

Heo Yun-su

(2005) radic radic radic radic

Kim Geun-seop

(2007) radic radic radic radic

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) radic

32

33 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green

Port Construction

Following the research above Port facilities rates and charges inland

connection and social circumstance are chose in this study port selection and

competitiveness department

e-RTGC Electric rubber tired gantry crane is a mobile gantry crane used for

stacking intermodal containers within the stacking areas of a container terminal

e-RTGC are used at container terminals and container storage yards to straddling

multiple lanes of railroad and container storage or when maximum storage

density in the container stack is desired

AMP is shorted for Alternative Marine Power and Itrsquos a facility which

provides the electric system in the land for ship which entry in the port The

facility can reduce emissions which ship get entrance in the port

AGV is a mobile robot that follows markers or wires in the floor or uses

vision or lasers They are most often used in industrial applications to move

materials around a manufacturing facility or a warehouse Automatic Guided

Vehicle systems work around-the-clock making continuous flow and just-in-time

delivery easier to achieve Application of the automatic guided vehicle has broade

33

ned during the late 20th century and they are no longer restricted to industrial

environments

The e-RTGC AMP and AGV are the new clean facilities and equipments in the

Green Port they donrsquot reduce the efficiency of handling cargo and they also

reduce the CO2 emission account

Green ship certification system if a ship utilizes clean and CO2 emission

reduction technology on the ship building adds equipment and management and

son on certification would be received And the port authority gives some

incentive and preferential treatment among 45 ports Such as a better schedule is

provided for green membership ship priority in handing cargo and discount on

entrance fee

Incentives on the new cleaning technology There are two expressions about

this measure one is that the port authority give a incentive to ship which have a

great utilization on the new cleaning technology and the other one is that

environment provide many incentives to the authority which utilize the new

cleaning technology in the port such as LED street lamp solar power cranes

Green flag The Green Flag incentive program was set up to encourage ships to

slow down in order to improve air quality The Green Flag program provides

approximately $2 million a year in discounts for vessel operators who slow their

ships to 12 knots (22kmh) or less within 20miles (32km) of the harbor

34

According to the Port the Green Flag program reduced air pollution by 600tons in

2007 and is expected to do better in 2008

All of Green ship certification system incentives on the new cleaning

technology and Green Flag are incentives provided for users of port and aimed at

reduce port rates and charges So the 3 measures belong to affect port rates and

charges

Eco-friendly transport means conversion Eco-friendly means of transport are

much accounted of green port for example railway discharge less GHG emission

than truck barge with a clean engine among the river and inshore canal

Joint distribution joint distribution is a collaborative system which port

provides among many logistics companies It can make the cargo handling speed

rapidly and reduce cargo storage time for CO2 emission reducing such as

refrigerated container In an addition it also makes the logistics companies

transport more efficient

Cost on amount of CO2 emission differenced from other port the cost on

amount of CO2 is included in the port cost The cost aims to reduce the CO2

emission directly

CO2 emission reduction policies compared with other traditional port Green

Port gives more cost discount and incentives but in an addition there are many

policies on CO2 emission restriction Such as aging trucks restrictions in inland

transport department ship entry speed reduced and fuel changed in the ship

35

department and so on Whether these restriction policies constrain port

development or not and the degree of these policies constrain port development

will be explain by the AHP results

Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors some ports in the

western countries are opened as a travel place for visitors so as to change the

polluted impress and raise the position in our heart

Cost on amount of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction policies and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors can affect the social

circumstance factor Whether these measures can or not improve the social

circumstance and port competitiveness we have to see the next calculation and

results

36

Chapter 4 The Green Port Competitiveness

Analysis

41 The Green Port Competitiveness Model by AHP

The AHP is one multi-criteria decision making method which has been

extensively applied to a variety of decision-making situations The multi-criteria

techniques are considered to be a promising framework for evaluation of

decision-making factors since they have the potential to take into account

conflicting multidimensional incommensurable and uncertain effects of

decisions explicitly

In order to apply the AHP method a hierarchical decision schema was

constructed by decomposing the decision problem into its decision elements

37

After that the importance or preferences of the decision elements are examined in

a pair-wise comparison to the elements in the hierarchy The parameters are

estimated using pair-wise comparisons between the importance of the attribute or

decision element in the function using data made by each responder Making

comparisons is a question of which of the two attributes is more import as well as

how much more important

Follow these theories the Green Port Competitiveness Model choose factors as

follow in port competitiveness factors part there are port facilities port rates and

charges inland connection social circumstance in Green Port construction part

there are e-RTGC AMP AGV green ship certification system green flag

incentives on the new cleaning technology eco-friendly transport means

conversion joint distribution CO2 emission reduction policies cost on amount of

CO2 emission beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

38

Figure 41 Green Port Competitiveness AHP model

Follow the Green Port Competitiveness AHP as shown we set a questionnaire

survey to many experts scholars working in logistics system area And we got 15

ones and 14 ones results are believable and integrated

42 Green Port Competitiveness Analysis

39

The key to construction of the factors which affects the port competitiveness

is to determine the conceptual model The selection of the factors directly affects

the evaluation of the result In order to ensure the accuracy objectivity and

practicality of evaluation results the following basic principles must be followed

when selecting factors systematic principles the principle of universal

comparability practical principle and goal-oriented principle In view of the

foregoing the competitiveness which affected by Green Port construction model

is made The analysis follows established principles of port competitiveness

evaluation taking into account the characteristics and functions of the port as well

as port facilities port services port rates and charges ship entrance inland

connection social circumstances and so on

(1) Port facilities

e-RTGC U11 AMP U12 AGV U13

(2) Port rates and charges

Green ship certification system U21 Incentives on the new clean

technology U22 Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

(3) Inland connection

Eco-friendly means of transport U31 Joint distribution U32

(4) Social circumstances

40

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41 CO2 emission reduction policies

U42 Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors U43

Table 421 Details of Level I and Level II values

Level I

indicators Symbol Level II indicators Symbol

Port facilities A1

e-RTGC U11

AMP U12

AGV U13

Port rates and

charges A2

Green ship certification system U21

Incentives on the new clean technology U22

Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

Inland

connection A3

Eco-friendly means of transport U31

Joint distribution U32

Social

circumstances A4

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41

CO2 emissions reduction policies U42

Beautiful environment construction in inner

harbors U43

41

I Determination of level I indicator weights

As the ports competitiveness evaluation indicators at this level are complex

and the elements are not easily quantified AHP is adopted to determine the

indicator weights with the basic steps as follows

(1) Establish a comparative judgment matrix The comparative judgment

matrix is obtained through comparing contributed proportion of multiple

indicators to the overall target by the judgment scale wherein the fuzzy

judgment number introduced is 1 3 5 7 and 9 and the reciprocal of

such number indicates the important degree of one element relatively to

another The results are shown in next table

Table 422 Comparison matrix of level I indicators

A1 A2 A3 A4

A1 1 15 13 3

A2 5 1 3 7

A3 3 13 1 5

A4 13 17 15 1

(2) Calculate the characteristic vector of the comparative judgment matrix

which refers to the weighted vector of the indicator The writer adopts

42

the geometric method to calculate the characteristic vector The

calculated result is as follows

ω=(012 0560 026 006)T λmax=418 It can be obtained from the table

RI=09 Wherein ω is the characteristic vector corresponding to the

maximum characteristic value λmax of the comparative judgment matrix

namely the weighted vector of the indicator RI is the average

consistency indicator as shown in following table

Table423 Average random consistency indicator RI

Matrix Order

RI

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

0 0 058 09 112 124 132 141

Matrix Order

RI

9 10 11 12 13 14 15

145 149 152 154 156 158 159

(3) Conduct consistency check on the comparative judgment matrix Adopt

the random consistency proportion CR to judge the consistency of the

comparative judgment matrix According to CI= (λmax -n)(n-1) and

CR=CIRI it can be obtained through calculation CR=007lt01 Thus

this comparative judgment matrix has a satisfactory consistency and the

indicator weight coefficient calculated through this matrix is acceptable

43

II Determination of level II indicator weights

The data at this level are the details of level Ⅰ indicator The judgment

matrix obtained through comparing multiple sub-indicators under Level Ⅰ

indicators is adopted to determine the weights of sub-indicators under each

indicator one by one The specific steps are as follows

(1) The experts score the weights within the given range To determine the

weights of several small indicators under the same big indicator it is

supposed that the score of small indicator ｋ under the indicator j made

by the expert i is Xijk wherein i=12n n is the total number of

experts ј=12m m is the total number of LevelⅡ indicator к

=12Oj Oj is the number of small indicators under the big indicator ј

іјк IJK LRC l I j k

(2) The credit rating of the expert і is l l =1 2 3 l =1 indicates this expert

is quite familiar with the evaluated contents l =2 indicator this expert is

44

with the evaluated contents l =3 indicates this expert is not quite familiar

with the evaluated contents yi1 is the=08 yi2 =05 and yi3=1

(3) The comprehensive evaluation score of small indicator l under the

indicator j is as follows

(4) The formula for normalization processing of indicator weights is as

follows and the absolute weight of the indicator set is marked as

q=(q1q2q11)

(5) Because of the same justification and principle we donrsquot give the detail

about the calculation The same with the level Ⅰ calculation we

manipulation data one by one and get 14 results And obtain the average

45

results by weighted average method The results detail as Table for the

final weights of Level-Ⅱ evaluation indicators

Above the calculation process and method are just one of data from the

questionable surveys In this study the final results are got from the

weighted average by the results of each questionable survey

The final results are shown as Table424

Table424 Indicator weights table of indicator system

Level I

indicators Weight LevelⅡ indicators

Relative

weight

Absolute

weight

Importance

percentage

Port Facilities

A1 02735

e-RTGC U11 05506 01506 1506

AMP U12 01648 00451 451

AGV U13 02826 00773 773

Port Rates and

Charges A2

02902

Green ship certification s

ystem U21 04724 01371 1371

Incentives on the new

clean technology U22 02871 00833 833

Green Flag (speed

reduction incentive)U23 02405 00698 698

Inland

connection A3

02865

Eco-friendly means of

transport U31 05942 01702 1702

Joint distribution U32 04058 01163 1163

Social

environmentA4 00863

Cost on amount of CO2

emission U41 03698 00319 319

CO2 emissions reduction

policies U42 02273 00196 196

Beautiful environment

construction in inner

harbors U43

04029 00348 348

46

III Case study

In the questionable survey we also got the mark of Green Port measures

evaluation value of many main ports such as Singapore Port Shanghai Port

Hongkong Port Busan Port LALB Port Rotterdam Port and Yocohama Port

The highest mark is 5 and lowest one is 1

Table425 Evaluation value of many main ports

Singapore

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

LALB

Port

Rotterdam

Port

Yocohama

Port

Port facilities 38000 36000 34000 38182 38000 42000 32000

Port rates and

charges 32000 36000 31000 35455 32000 39000 33000

Inland

connection 39000 34545 35000 29091 35000 45000 36000

Social

circumstance 42000 32727 41000 32000 38000 42727 36000

With the Green Port and Port competitiveness indicator weights results these

ports got the final evaluation value

47

Table426 Final evaluation value on main ports Green Port measures and

competitiveness

Rotterdam

Port

Singapore

Port

LALB

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

Yocohama

Port

394 345 330 330 319 318 317

43 Results Analysis

From the results table we can obtain the many results as following

① The main Green Port measures which are more important to improve port

competitiveness are Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system the indicator weights are 01702 01506 and

01371 among the 11 indicators

② In the Green Port construction Cost on amount of CO2 emission and CO2

emissions reduction policies are the restrictions indicators but the weight

of two indicators are not big 00319 and 00196 So effect on Green Port

construction to port competitiveness does have the weaken capacity but

not clearly strengthen more clearly Thus Green Port construction really

could improve the port competitiveness

48

③ In the case study traditional ports Rotterdam and Singapore Port give us

better examples on Green Port construction especially Rotterdam Port

④ Hongkong Busan and Yocohama Port all got a lower evaluation value

But in detail Hongkong and Yocohama Port got a lower on the port

facilities and rates and charges Busan Port got a higher on the port

facilities and rates and charges but a lower on the inland connection and

social circumstance

⑤ Shanghai Port doesnrsquot have Particular strength factors but the

comprehensive strength is not bad the same as LALB Port

49

Chapter 5 Conclusion

In this thesis the effects of Green Port construction for improving the port

competitiveness have been studied Under the definition of Green Port the

characteristics of Green Port and its effects has been shown by analysing the AHP

method which based on the questionary survey for Green Port specialists and port

officers

Follow the results of analysis on Green Port competitiveness AHP model

Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green ship certification system is

better for Green Port Construction welcome for shipping companies and citizens

who live around the port And in the analysis of Port competitiveness factors port

rates and charges always affects port competitiveness a lot As a trend inland

connection factor abstracts more attention of shipping companies

50

On the trend of port department each port should take a activity to adjust

strategy for improving its competitiveness Such as in the main ports evaluation

Busan port get a high value on port rates and charges and port facilities but as a

lower value on inland connection factor the final value is not as well as we look

forward In the evaluation of Singapore Port through it gets a lower value on rates

and charges higher value on inland connection and social circumstance causes the

final value are better So the Green Port Construction may be a trend in port

department

In the results of this thesis Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system are better solutions for Green Port Construction And

especially it can be verified that the port rates and charges always affects port

competitiveness Futhermore the investment for Green Port construction and its

effects have to be verified in the future

51

References

1 Hoyle B S and Smith J 1992 Transport and Development In Modern

transport geography edited by B S Hoyle R D Knowles (London Belhaven

Press)pp11-31

2 Beresford A K C De Souza A J R G and Pettit S J 2005 Stategic

development of liner shipping companies and terminal operators Ocean yearbook

19(Chicago 1L The University of Chicago Press) pp 732-750

3 Heaver T D 2002 Supply chain and logistics management implications for

liner shipping In The handbook of maritime economics and business edited by C

Grammenos (LondonLLP) pp 375-396

4 Park T E (2011) A Study on selection criteria of Green Port and evaluation of

major Korean port A masters thesis of graduate school of Incheon university

52

5 JeongBH (2009)Green port management policy directions in the green

growth era- The case of Gwangyang port in Republic of Korea Journal of Korea

Port Economic Association Vol25(3) p361-384

6 Lee J S Han N H(2009) A study on Green Port Revitalization According to

Air Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

7 Lee Y K Nan J W(2010)Green Logistics Policy Analysis and Implications

of Japan

8 Lee B S (2010)Tendency and Countermeasures on Green Logistics in Port

Logistics Company A masters thesis of graduate school of Korean Maritime

university

9 Lee J S (2009) A Study on Green Port Revitalization According to Air

Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

10 Zhang F Y Li Z Lu X J Yao X L(2008)Competitiveness of Inland

Ports Based on F-AHP

11 Port of Long Beach (2009) Green Port Policy wwwpolbcom

12 The port of Los Angeles wwwportoflosangelesorg

29

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005)

voyage degree to attract cargo cargo handling cost amount of

handling cargo connection to inland service reliability location

berth availability quay length feeder network depth

transshipment volumes cargo security profitability

offing degree to attract cargo berth availability cargo handling

cost transshipment volumes

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005)

cargo handling amount port facilities location rates and charges

level of service

Heo Yun-su

(2005)

port facilities rates and charges services marketing geopolitics

location economic and social circumstance

Kim Geun-seop

(2007)

port services facilities cargo handling amount location cost

productivity factor global factor

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) rates and charges services port characteristics

Many experts and scholars make a research on port selection and

competitiveness recently But the factors selection criteria are difference

Nevertheless the main factors are facilities services cost and so on

Therefore port competitiveness factors which chose in this study are port

facilities port services port rates and charges and social circumstance

However the main factors are not the whole factors any more more and more

detail factors and characteristic factors appearance Port selection and

competitiveness factors have changed And the development content is introduced

in next part

30

32 Port Competitiveness Development Tree

As mentioned above port facilities port rates and charges and port location are

the basic factors in the port selection and competitiveness

From the following table we can discover that first one facilities rates and

charges and location are the most important factor in port selection and

competitiveness second one the importance of social circumstance turns larger

inland connection is necessary all the time

Table 321 Main factor in the Pretentious Research

31

port facilities rates and

charges

inland

connection

social

circumstance location

French (1979) radic radic radic

Wiliingale (1982) radic radic

Slack (1985) radic

Pater (1990) radic radic

UNCTAD (1992) radic radic radic

Murphy(1992) radic

Jeon Il-su (1992) radic radic radic

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

(1993)

radic radic radic

Kim Hak-so

(1993) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1996) radic radic radic

Ha Dong-u

amp Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1998) radic radic radic

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

radic

Kum Jong-su

(2001) radic radic radic radic

Kim Jin-gu(2002) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(2002) radic radic

Lirn(2003-2004) radic radic radic

Pater(2004) radic

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005) radic radic radic

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005) radic radic radic

Heo Yun-su

(2005) radic radic radic radic

Kim Geun-seop

(2007) radic radic radic radic

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) radic

32

33 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green

Port Construction

Following the research above Port facilities rates and charges inland

connection and social circumstance are chose in this study port selection and

competitiveness department

e-RTGC Electric rubber tired gantry crane is a mobile gantry crane used for

stacking intermodal containers within the stacking areas of a container terminal

e-RTGC are used at container terminals and container storage yards to straddling

multiple lanes of railroad and container storage or when maximum storage

density in the container stack is desired

AMP is shorted for Alternative Marine Power and Itrsquos a facility which

provides the electric system in the land for ship which entry in the port The

facility can reduce emissions which ship get entrance in the port

AGV is a mobile robot that follows markers or wires in the floor or uses

vision or lasers They are most often used in industrial applications to move

materials around a manufacturing facility or a warehouse Automatic Guided

Vehicle systems work around-the-clock making continuous flow and just-in-time

delivery easier to achieve Application of the automatic guided vehicle has broade

33

ned during the late 20th century and they are no longer restricted to industrial

environments

The e-RTGC AMP and AGV are the new clean facilities and equipments in the

Green Port they donrsquot reduce the efficiency of handling cargo and they also

reduce the CO2 emission account

Green ship certification system if a ship utilizes clean and CO2 emission

reduction technology on the ship building adds equipment and management and

son on certification would be received And the port authority gives some

incentive and preferential treatment among 45 ports Such as a better schedule is

provided for green membership ship priority in handing cargo and discount on

entrance fee

Incentives on the new cleaning technology There are two expressions about

this measure one is that the port authority give a incentive to ship which have a

great utilization on the new cleaning technology and the other one is that

environment provide many incentives to the authority which utilize the new

cleaning technology in the port such as LED street lamp solar power cranes

Green flag The Green Flag incentive program was set up to encourage ships to

slow down in order to improve air quality The Green Flag program provides

approximately $2 million a year in discounts for vessel operators who slow their

ships to 12 knots (22kmh) or less within 20miles (32km) of the harbor

34

According to the Port the Green Flag program reduced air pollution by 600tons in

2007 and is expected to do better in 2008

All of Green ship certification system incentives on the new cleaning

technology and Green Flag are incentives provided for users of port and aimed at

reduce port rates and charges So the 3 measures belong to affect port rates and

charges

Eco-friendly transport means conversion Eco-friendly means of transport are

much accounted of green port for example railway discharge less GHG emission

than truck barge with a clean engine among the river and inshore canal

Joint distribution joint distribution is a collaborative system which port

provides among many logistics companies It can make the cargo handling speed

rapidly and reduce cargo storage time for CO2 emission reducing such as

refrigerated container In an addition it also makes the logistics companies

transport more efficient

Cost on amount of CO2 emission differenced from other port the cost on

amount of CO2 is included in the port cost The cost aims to reduce the CO2

emission directly

CO2 emission reduction policies compared with other traditional port Green

Port gives more cost discount and incentives but in an addition there are many

policies on CO2 emission restriction Such as aging trucks restrictions in inland

transport department ship entry speed reduced and fuel changed in the ship

35

department and so on Whether these restriction policies constrain port

development or not and the degree of these policies constrain port development

will be explain by the AHP results

Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors some ports in the

western countries are opened as a travel place for visitors so as to change the

polluted impress and raise the position in our heart

Cost on amount of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction policies and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors can affect the social

circumstance factor Whether these measures can or not improve the social

circumstance and port competitiveness we have to see the next calculation and

results

36

Chapter 4 The Green Port Competitiveness

Analysis

41 The Green Port Competitiveness Model by AHP

The AHP is one multi-criteria decision making method which has been

extensively applied to a variety of decision-making situations The multi-criteria

techniques are considered to be a promising framework for evaluation of

decision-making factors since they have the potential to take into account

conflicting multidimensional incommensurable and uncertain effects of

decisions explicitly

In order to apply the AHP method a hierarchical decision schema was

constructed by decomposing the decision problem into its decision elements

37

After that the importance or preferences of the decision elements are examined in

a pair-wise comparison to the elements in the hierarchy The parameters are

estimated using pair-wise comparisons between the importance of the attribute or

decision element in the function using data made by each responder Making

comparisons is a question of which of the two attributes is more import as well as

how much more important

Follow these theories the Green Port Competitiveness Model choose factors as

follow in port competitiveness factors part there are port facilities port rates and

charges inland connection social circumstance in Green Port construction part

there are e-RTGC AMP AGV green ship certification system green flag

incentives on the new cleaning technology eco-friendly transport means

conversion joint distribution CO2 emission reduction policies cost on amount of

CO2 emission beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

38

Figure 41 Green Port Competitiveness AHP model

Follow the Green Port Competitiveness AHP as shown we set a questionnaire

survey to many experts scholars working in logistics system area And we got 15

ones and 14 ones results are believable and integrated

42 Green Port Competitiveness Analysis

39

The key to construction of the factors which affects the port competitiveness

is to determine the conceptual model The selection of the factors directly affects

the evaluation of the result In order to ensure the accuracy objectivity and

practicality of evaluation results the following basic principles must be followed

when selecting factors systematic principles the principle of universal

comparability practical principle and goal-oriented principle In view of the

foregoing the competitiveness which affected by Green Port construction model

is made The analysis follows established principles of port competitiveness

evaluation taking into account the characteristics and functions of the port as well

as port facilities port services port rates and charges ship entrance inland

connection social circumstances and so on

(1) Port facilities

e-RTGC U11 AMP U12 AGV U13

(2) Port rates and charges

Green ship certification system U21 Incentives on the new clean

technology U22 Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

(3) Inland connection

Eco-friendly means of transport U31 Joint distribution U32

(4) Social circumstances

40

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41 CO2 emission reduction policies

U42 Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors U43

Table 421 Details of Level I and Level II values

Level I

indicators Symbol Level II indicators Symbol

Port facilities A1

e-RTGC U11

AMP U12

AGV U13

Port rates and

charges A2

Green ship certification system U21

Incentives on the new clean technology U22

Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

Inland

connection A3

Eco-friendly means of transport U31

Joint distribution U32

Social

circumstances A4

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41

CO2 emissions reduction policies U42

Beautiful environment construction in inner

harbors U43

41

I Determination of level I indicator weights

As the ports competitiveness evaluation indicators at this level are complex

and the elements are not easily quantified AHP is adopted to determine the

indicator weights with the basic steps as follows

(1) Establish a comparative judgment matrix The comparative judgment

matrix is obtained through comparing contributed proportion of multiple

indicators to the overall target by the judgment scale wherein the fuzzy

judgment number introduced is 1 3 5 7 and 9 and the reciprocal of

such number indicates the important degree of one element relatively to

another The results are shown in next table

Table 422 Comparison matrix of level I indicators

A1 A2 A3 A4

A1 1 15 13 3

A2 5 1 3 7

A3 3 13 1 5

A4 13 17 15 1

(2) Calculate the characteristic vector of the comparative judgment matrix

which refers to the weighted vector of the indicator The writer adopts

42

the geometric method to calculate the characteristic vector The

calculated result is as follows

ω=(012 0560 026 006)T λmax=418 It can be obtained from the table

RI=09 Wherein ω is the characteristic vector corresponding to the

maximum characteristic value λmax of the comparative judgment matrix

namely the weighted vector of the indicator RI is the average

consistency indicator as shown in following table

Table423 Average random consistency indicator RI

Matrix Order

RI

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

0 0 058 09 112 124 132 141

Matrix Order

RI

9 10 11 12 13 14 15

145 149 152 154 156 158 159

(3) Conduct consistency check on the comparative judgment matrix Adopt

the random consistency proportion CR to judge the consistency of the

comparative judgment matrix According to CI= (λmax -n)(n-1) and

CR=CIRI it can be obtained through calculation CR=007lt01 Thus

this comparative judgment matrix has a satisfactory consistency and the

indicator weight coefficient calculated through this matrix is acceptable

43

II Determination of level II indicator weights

The data at this level are the details of level Ⅰ indicator The judgment

matrix obtained through comparing multiple sub-indicators under Level Ⅰ

indicators is adopted to determine the weights of sub-indicators under each

indicator one by one The specific steps are as follows

(1) The experts score the weights within the given range To determine the

weights of several small indicators under the same big indicator it is

supposed that the score of small indicator ｋ under the indicator j made

by the expert i is Xijk wherein i=12n n is the total number of

experts ј=12m m is the total number of LevelⅡ indicator к

=12Oj Oj is the number of small indicators under the big indicator ј

іјк IJK LRC l I j k

(2) The credit rating of the expert і is l l =1 2 3 l =1 indicates this expert

is quite familiar with the evaluated contents l =2 indicator this expert is

44

with the evaluated contents l =3 indicates this expert is not quite familiar

with the evaluated contents yi1 is the=08 yi2 =05 and yi3=1

(3) The comprehensive evaluation score of small indicator l under the

indicator j is as follows

(4) The formula for normalization processing of indicator weights is as

follows and the absolute weight of the indicator set is marked as

q=(q1q2q11)

(5) Because of the same justification and principle we donrsquot give the detail

about the calculation The same with the level Ⅰ calculation we

manipulation data one by one and get 14 results And obtain the average

45

results by weighted average method The results detail as Table for the

final weights of Level-Ⅱ evaluation indicators

Above the calculation process and method are just one of data from the

questionable surveys In this study the final results are got from the

weighted average by the results of each questionable survey

The final results are shown as Table424

Table424 Indicator weights table of indicator system

Level I

indicators Weight LevelⅡ indicators

Relative

weight

Absolute

weight

Importance

percentage

Port Facilities

A1 02735

e-RTGC U11 05506 01506 1506

AMP U12 01648 00451 451

AGV U13 02826 00773 773

Port Rates and

Charges A2

02902

Green ship certification s

ystem U21 04724 01371 1371

Incentives on the new

clean technology U22 02871 00833 833

Green Flag (speed

reduction incentive)U23 02405 00698 698

Inland

connection A3

02865

Eco-friendly means of

transport U31 05942 01702 1702

Joint distribution U32 04058 01163 1163

Social

environmentA4 00863

Cost on amount of CO2

emission U41 03698 00319 319

CO2 emissions reduction

policies U42 02273 00196 196

Beautiful environment

construction in inner

harbors U43

04029 00348 348

46

III Case study

In the questionable survey we also got the mark of Green Port measures

evaluation value of many main ports such as Singapore Port Shanghai Port

Hongkong Port Busan Port LALB Port Rotterdam Port and Yocohama Port

The highest mark is 5 and lowest one is 1

Table425 Evaluation value of many main ports

Singapore

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

LALB

Port

Rotterdam

Port

Yocohama

Port

Port facilities 38000 36000 34000 38182 38000 42000 32000

Port rates and

charges 32000 36000 31000 35455 32000 39000 33000

Inland

connection 39000 34545 35000 29091 35000 45000 36000

Social

circumstance 42000 32727 41000 32000 38000 42727 36000

With the Green Port and Port competitiveness indicator weights results these

ports got the final evaluation value

47

Table426 Final evaluation value on main ports Green Port measures and

competitiveness

Rotterdam

Port

Singapore

Port

LALB

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

Yocohama

Port

394 345 330 330 319 318 317

43 Results Analysis

From the results table we can obtain the many results as following

① The main Green Port measures which are more important to improve port

competitiveness are Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system the indicator weights are 01702 01506 and

01371 among the 11 indicators

② In the Green Port construction Cost on amount of CO2 emission and CO2

emissions reduction policies are the restrictions indicators but the weight

of two indicators are not big 00319 and 00196 So effect on Green Port

construction to port competitiveness does have the weaken capacity but

not clearly strengthen more clearly Thus Green Port construction really

could improve the port competitiveness

48

③ In the case study traditional ports Rotterdam and Singapore Port give us

better examples on Green Port construction especially Rotterdam Port

④ Hongkong Busan and Yocohama Port all got a lower evaluation value

But in detail Hongkong and Yocohama Port got a lower on the port

facilities and rates and charges Busan Port got a higher on the port

facilities and rates and charges but a lower on the inland connection and

social circumstance

⑤ Shanghai Port doesnrsquot have Particular strength factors but the

comprehensive strength is not bad the same as LALB Port

49

Chapter 5 Conclusion

In this thesis the effects of Green Port construction for improving the port

competitiveness have been studied Under the definition of Green Port the

characteristics of Green Port and its effects has been shown by analysing the AHP

method which based on the questionary survey for Green Port specialists and port

officers

Follow the results of analysis on Green Port competitiveness AHP model

Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green ship certification system is

better for Green Port Construction welcome for shipping companies and citizens

who live around the port And in the analysis of Port competitiveness factors port

rates and charges always affects port competitiveness a lot As a trend inland

connection factor abstracts more attention of shipping companies

50

On the trend of port department each port should take a activity to adjust

strategy for improving its competitiveness Such as in the main ports evaluation

Busan port get a high value on port rates and charges and port facilities but as a

lower value on inland connection factor the final value is not as well as we look

forward In the evaluation of Singapore Port through it gets a lower value on rates

and charges higher value on inland connection and social circumstance causes the

final value are better So the Green Port Construction may be a trend in port

department

In the results of this thesis Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system are better solutions for Green Port Construction And

especially it can be verified that the port rates and charges always affects port

competitiveness Futhermore the investment for Green Port construction and its

effects have to be verified in the future

51

References

1 Hoyle B S and Smith J 1992 Transport and Development In Modern

transport geography edited by B S Hoyle R D Knowles (London Belhaven

Press)pp11-31

2 Beresford A K C De Souza A J R G and Pettit S J 2005 Stategic

development of liner shipping companies and terminal operators Ocean yearbook

19(Chicago 1L The University of Chicago Press) pp 732-750

3 Heaver T D 2002 Supply chain and logistics management implications for

liner shipping In The handbook of maritime economics and business edited by C

Grammenos (LondonLLP) pp 375-396

4 Park T E (2011) A Study on selection criteria of Green Port and evaluation of

major Korean port A masters thesis of graduate school of Incheon university

52

5 JeongBH (2009)Green port management policy directions in the green

growth era- The case of Gwangyang port in Republic of Korea Journal of Korea

Port Economic Association Vol25(3) p361-384

6 Lee J S Han N H(2009) A study on Green Port Revitalization According to

Air Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

7 Lee Y K Nan J W(2010)Green Logistics Policy Analysis and Implications

of Japan

8 Lee B S (2010)Tendency and Countermeasures on Green Logistics in Port

Logistics Company A masters thesis of graduate school of Korean Maritime

university

9 Lee J S (2009) A Study on Green Port Revitalization According to Air

Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

10 Zhang F Y Li Z Lu X J Yao X L(2008)Competitiveness of Inland

Ports Based on F-AHP

11 Port of Long Beach (2009) Green Port Policy wwwpolbcom

12 The port of Los Angeles wwwportoflosangelesorg

30

32 Port Competitiveness Development Tree

As mentioned above port facilities port rates and charges and port location are

the basic factors in the port selection and competitiveness

From the following table we can discover that first one facilities rates and

charges and location are the most important factor in port selection and

competitiveness second one the importance of social circumstance turns larger

inland connection is necessary all the time

Table 321 Main factor in the Pretentious Research

31

port facilities rates and

charges

inland

connection

social

circumstance location

French (1979) radic radic radic

Wiliingale (1982) radic radic

Slack (1985) radic

Pater (1990) radic radic

UNCTAD (1992) radic radic radic

Murphy(1992) radic

Jeon Il-su (1992) radic radic radic

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

(1993)

radic radic radic

Kim Hak-so

(1993) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1996) radic radic radic

Ha Dong-u

amp Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1998) radic radic radic

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

radic

Kum Jong-su

(2001) radic radic radic radic

Kim Jin-gu(2002) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(2002) radic radic

Lirn(2003-2004) radic radic radic

Pater(2004) radic

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005) radic radic radic

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005) radic radic radic

Heo Yun-su

(2005) radic radic radic radic

Kim Geun-seop

(2007) radic radic radic radic

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) radic

32

33 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green

Port Construction

Following the research above Port facilities rates and charges inland

connection and social circumstance are chose in this study port selection and

competitiveness department

e-RTGC Electric rubber tired gantry crane is a mobile gantry crane used for

stacking intermodal containers within the stacking areas of a container terminal

e-RTGC are used at container terminals and container storage yards to straddling

multiple lanes of railroad and container storage or when maximum storage

density in the container stack is desired

AMP is shorted for Alternative Marine Power and Itrsquos a facility which

provides the electric system in the land for ship which entry in the port The

facility can reduce emissions which ship get entrance in the port

AGV is a mobile robot that follows markers or wires in the floor or uses

vision or lasers They are most often used in industrial applications to move

materials around a manufacturing facility or a warehouse Automatic Guided

Vehicle systems work around-the-clock making continuous flow and just-in-time

delivery easier to achieve Application of the automatic guided vehicle has broade

33

ned during the late 20th century and they are no longer restricted to industrial

environments

The e-RTGC AMP and AGV are the new clean facilities and equipments in the

Green Port they donrsquot reduce the efficiency of handling cargo and they also

reduce the CO2 emission account

Green ship certification system if a ship utilizes clean and CO2 emission

reduction technology on the ship building adds equipment and management and

son on certification would be received And the port authority gives some

incentive and preferential treatment among 45 ports Such as a better schedule is

provided for green membership ship priority in handing cargo and discount on

entrance fee

Incentives on the new cleaning technology There are two expressions about

this measure one is that the port authority give a incentive to ship which have a

great utilization on the new cleaning technology and the other one is that

environment provide many incentives to the authority which utilize the new

cleaning technology in the port such as LED street lamp solar power cranes

Green flag The Green Flag incentive program was set up to encourage ships to

slow down in order to improve air quality The Green Flag program provides

approximately $2 million a year in discounts for vessel operators who slow their

ships to 12 knots (22kmh) or less within 20miles (32km) of the harbor

34

According to the Port the Green Flag program reduced air pollution by 600tons in

2007 and is expected to do better in 2008

All of Green ship certification system incentives on the new cleaning

technology and Green Flag are incentives provided for users of port and aimed at

reduce port rates and charges So the 3 measures belong to affect port rates and

charges

Eco-friendly transport means conversion Eco-friendly means of transport are

much accounted of green port for example railway discharge less GHG emission

than truck barge with a clean engine among the river and inshore canal

Joint distribution joint distribution is a collaborative system which port

provides among many logistics companies It can make the cargo handling speed

rapidly and reduce cargo storage time for CO2 emission reducing such as

refrigerated container In an addition it also makes the logistics companies

transport more efficient

Cost on amount of CO2 emission differenced from other port the cost on

amount of CO2 is included in the port cost The cost aims to reduce the CO2

emission directly

CO2 emission reduction policies compared with other traditional port Green

Port gives more cost discount and incentives but in an addition there are many

policies on CO2 emission restriction Such as aging trucks restrictions in inland

transport department ship entry speed reduced and fuel changed in the ship

35

department and so on Whether these restriction policies constrain port

development or not and the degree of these policies constrain port development

will be explain by the AHP results

Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors some ports in the

western countries are opened as a travel place for visitors so as to change the

polluted impress and raise the position in our heart

Cost on amount of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction policies and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors can affect the social

circumstance factor Whether these measures can or not improve the social

circumstance and port competitiveness we have to see the next calculation and

results

36

Chapter 4 The Green Port Competitiveness

Analysis

41 The Green Port Competitiveness Model by AHP

The AHP is one multi-criteria decision making method which has been

extensively applied to a variety of decision-making situations The multi-criteria

techniques are considered to be a promising framework for evaluation of

decision-making factors since they have the potential to take into account

conflicting multidimensional incommensurable and uncertain effects of

decisions explicitly

In order to apply the AHP method a hierarchical decision schema was

constructed by decomposing the decision problem into its decision elements

37

After that the importance or preferences of the decision elements are examined in

a pair-wise comparison to the elements in the hierarchy The parameters are

estimated using pair-wise comparisons between the importance of the attribute or

decision element in the function using data made by each responder Making

comparisons is a question of which of the two attributes is more import as well as

how much more important

Follow these theories the Green Port Competitiveness Model choose factors as

follow in port competitiveness factors part there are port facilities port rates and

charges inland connection social circumstance in Green Port construction part

there are e-RTGC AMP AGV green ship certification system green flag

incentives on the new cleaning technology eco-friendly transport means

conversion joint distribution CO2 emission reduction policies cost on amount of

CO2 emission beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

38

Figure 41 Green Port Competitiveness AHP model

Follow the Green Port Competitiveness AHP as shown we set a questionnaire

survey to many experts scholars working in logistics system area And we got 15

ones and 14 ones results are believable and integrated

42 Green Port Competitiveness Analysis

39

The key to construction of the factors which affects the port competitiveness

is to determine the conceptual model The selection of the factors directly affects

the evaluation of the result In order to ensure the accuracy objectivity and

practicality of evaluation results the following basic principles must be followed

when selecting factors systematic principles the principle of universal

comparability practical principle and goal-oriented principle In view of the

foregoing the competitiveness which affected by Green Port construction model

is made The analysis follows established principles of port competitiveness

evaluation taking into account the characteristics and functions of the port as well

as port facilities port services port rates and charges ship entrance inland

connection social circumstances and so on

(1) Port facilities

e-RTGC U11 AMP U12 AGV U13

(2) Port rates and charges

Green ship certification system U21 Incentives on the new clean

technology U22 Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

(3) Inland connection

Eco-friendly means of transport U31 Joint distribution U32

(4) Social circumstances

40

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41 CO2 emission reduction policies

U42 Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors U43

Table 421 Details of Level I and Level II values

Level I

indicators Symbol Level II indicators Symbol

Port facilities A1

e-RTGC U11

AMP U12

AGV U13

Port rates and

charges A2

Green ship certification system U21

Incentives on the new clean technology U22

Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

Inland

connection A3

Eco-friendly means of transport U31

Joint distribution U32

Social

circumstances A4

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41

CO2 emissions reduction policies U42

Beautiful environment construction in inner

harbors U43

41

I Determination of level I indicator weights

As the ports competitiveness evaluation indicators at this level are complex

and the elements are not easily quantified AHP is adopted to determine the

indicator weights with the basic steps as follows

(1) Establish a comparative judgment matrix The comparative judgment

matrix is obtained through comparing contributed proportion of multiple

indicators to the overall target by the judgment scale wherein the fuzzy

judgment number introduced is 1 3 5 7 and 9 and the reciprocal of

such number indicates the important degree of one element relatively to

another The results are shown in next table

Table 422 Comparison matrix of level I indicators

A1 A2 A3 A4

A1 1 15 13 3

A2 5 1 3 7

A3 3 13 1 5

A4 13 17 15 1

(2) Calculate the characteristic vector of the comparative judgment matrix

which refers to the weighted vector of the indicator The writer adopts

42

the geometric method to calculate the characteristic vector The

calculated result is as follows

ω=(012 0560 026 006)T λmax=418 It can be obtained from the table

RI=09 Wherein ω is the characteristic vector corresponding to the

maximum characteristic value λmax of the comparative judgment matrix

namely the weighted vector of the indicator RI is the average

consistency indicator as shown in following table

Table423 Average random consistency indicator RI

Matrix Order

RI

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

0 0 058 09 112 124 132 141

Matrix Order

RI

9 10 11 12 13 14 15

145 149 152 154 156 158 159

(3) Conduct consistency check on the comparative judgment matrix Adopt

the random consistency proportion CR to judge the consistency of the

comparative judgment matrix According to CI= (λmax -n)(n-1) and

CR=CIRI it can be obtained through calculation CR=007lt01 Thus

this comparative judgment matrix has a satisfactory consistency and the

indicator weight coefficient calculated through this matrix is acceptable

43

II Determination of level II indicator weights

The data at this level are the details of level Ⅰ indicator The judgment

matrix obtained through comparing multiple sub-indicators under Level Ⅰ

indicators is adopted to determine the weights of sub-indicators under each

indicator one by one The specific steps are as follows

(1) The experts score the weights within the given range To determine the

weights of several small indicators under the same big indicator it is

supposed that the score of small indicator ｋ under the indicator j made

by the expert i is Xijk wherein i=12n n is the total number of

experts ј=12m m is the total number of LevelⅡ indicator к

=12Oj Oj is the number of small indicators under the big indicator ј

іјк IJK LRC l I j k

(2) The credit rating of the expert і is l l =1 2 3 l =1 indicates this expert

is quite familiar with the evaluated contents l =2 indicator this expert is

44

with the evaluated contents l =3 indicates this expert is not quite familiar

with the evaluated contents yi1 is the=08 yi2 =05 and yi3=1

(3) The comprehensive evaluation score of small indicator l under the

indicator j is as follows

(4) The formula for normalization processing of indicator weights is as

follows and the absolute weight of the indicator set is marked as

q=(q1q2q11)

(5) Because of the same justification and principle we donrsquot give the detail

about the calculation The same with the level Ⅰ calculation we

manipulation data one by one and get 14 results And obtain the average

45

results by weighted average method The results detail as Table for the

final weights of Level-Ⅱ evaluation indicators

Above the calculation process and method are just one of data from the

questionable surveys In this study the final results are got from the

weighted average by the results of each questionable survey

The final results are shown as Table424

Table424 Indicator weights table of indicator system

Level I

indicators Weight LevelⅡ indicators

Relative

weight

Absolute

weight

Importance

percentage

Port Facilities

A1 02735

e-RTGC U11 05506 01506 1506

AMP U12 01648 00451 451

AGV U13 02826 00773 773

Port Rates and

Charges A2

02902

Green ship certification s

ystem U21 04724 01371 1371

Incentives on the new

clean technology U22 02871 00833 833

Green Flag (speed

reduction incentive)U23 02405 00698 698

Inland

connection A3

02865

Eco-friendly means of

transport U31 05942 01702 1702

Joint distribution U32 04058 01163 1163

Social

environmentA4 00863

Cost on amount of CO2

emission U41 03698 00319 319

CO2 emissions reduction

policies U42 02273 00196 196

Beautiful environment

construction in inner

harbors U43

04029 00348 348

46

III Case study

In the questionable survey we also got the mark of Green Port measures

evaluation value of many main ports such as Singapore Port Shanghai Port

Hongkong Port Busan Port LALB Port Rotterdam Port and Yocohama Port

The highest mark is 5 and lowest one is 1

Table425 Evaluation value of many main ports

Singapore

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

LALB

Port

Rotterdam

Port

Yocohama

Port

Port facilities 38000 36000 34000 38182 38000 42000 32000

Port rates and

charges 32000 36000 31000 35455 32000 39000 33000

Inland

connection 39000 34545 35000 29091 35000 45000 36000

Social

circumstance 42000 32727 41000 32000 38000 42727 36000

With the Green Port and Port competitiveness indicator weights results these

ports got the final evaluation value

47

Table426 Final evaluation value on main ports Green Port measures and

competitiveness

Rotterdam

Port

Singapore

Port

LALB

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

Yocohama

Port

394 345 330 330 319 318 317

43 Results Analysis

From the results table we can obtain the many results as following

① The main Green Port measures which are more important to improve port

competitiveness are Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system the indicator weights are 01702 01506 and

01371 among the 11 indicators

② In the Green Port construction Cost on amount of CO2 emission and CO2

emissions reduction policies are the restrictions indicators but the weight

of two indicators are not big 00319 and 00196 So effect on Green Port

construction to port competitiveness does have the weaken capacity but

not clearly strengthen more clearly Thus Green Port construction really

could improve the port competitiveness

48

③ In the case study traditional ports Rotterdam and Singapore Port give us

better examples on Green Port construction especially Rotterdam Port

④ Hongkong Busan and Yocohama Port all got a lower evaluation value

But in detail Hongkong and Yocohama Port got a lower on the port

facilities and rates and charges Busan Port got a higher on the port

facilities and rates and charges but a lower on the inland connection and

social circumstance

⑤ Shanghai Port doesnrsquot have Particular strength factors but the

comprehensive strength is not bad the same as LALB Port

49

Chapter 5 Conclusion

In this thesis the effects of Green Port construction for improving the port

competitiveness have been studied Under the definition of Green Port the

characteristics of Green Port and its effects has been shown by analysing the AHP

method which based on the questionary survey for Green Port specialists and port

officers

Follow the results of analysis on Green Port competitiveness AHP model

Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green ship certification system is

better for Green Port Construction welcome for shipping companies and citizens

who live around the port And in the analysis of Port competitiveness factors port

rates and charges always affects port competitiveness a lot As a trend inland

connection factor abstracts more attention of shipping companies

50

On the trend of port department each port should take a activity to adjust

strategy for improving its competitiveness Such as in the main ports evaluation

Busan port get a high value on port rates and charges and port facilities but as a

lower value on inland connection factor the final value is not as well as we look

forward In the evaluation of Singapore Port through it gets a lower value on rates

and charges higher value on inland connection and social circumstance causes the

final value are better So the Green Port Construction may be a trend in port

department

In the results of this thesis Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system are better solutions for Green Port Construction And

especially it can be verified that the port rates and charges always affects port

competitiveness Futhermore the investment for Green Port construction and its

effects have to be verified in the future

51

References

1 Hoyle B S and Smith J 1992 Transport and Development In Modern

transport geography edited by B S Hoyle R D Knowles (London Belhaven

Press)pp11-31

2 Beresford A K C De Souza A J R G and Pettit S J 2005 Stategic

development of liner shipping companies and terminal operators Ocean yearbook

19(Chicago 1L The University of Chicago Press) pp 732-750

3 Heaver T D 2002 Supply chain and logistics management implications for

liner shipping In The handbook of maritime economics and business edited by C

Grammenos (LondonLLP) pp 375-396

4 Park T E (2011) A Study on selection criteria of Green Port and evaluation of

major Korean port A masters thesis of graduate school of Incheon university

52

5 JeongBH (2009)Green port management policy directions in the green

growth era- The case of Gwangyang port in Republic of Korea Journal of Korea

Port Economic Association Vol25(3) p361-384

6 Lee J S Han N H(2009) A study on Green Port Revitalization According to

Air Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

7 Lee Y K Nan J W(2010)Green Logistics Policy Analysis and Implications

of Japan

8 Lee B S (2010)Tendency and Countermeasures on Green Logistics in Port

Logistics Company A masters thesis of graduate school of Korean Maritime

university

9 Lee J S (2009) A Study on Green Port Revitalization According to Air

Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

10 Zhang F Y Li Z Lu X J Yao X L(2008)Competitiveness of Inland

Ports Based on F-AHP

11 Port of Long Beach (2009) Green Port Policy wwwpolbcom

12 The port of Los Angeles wwwportoflosangelesorg

31

port facilities rates and

charges

inland

connection

social

circumstance location

French (1979) radic radic radic

Wiliingale (1982) radic radic

Slack (1985) radic

Pater (1990) radic radic

UNCTAD (1992) radic radic radic

Murphy(1992) radic

Jeon Il-su (1992) radic radic radic

Lee Seok-taek amp

Lee Cheol-yeong

(1993)

radic radic radic

Kim Hak-so

(1993) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1996) radic radic radic

Ha Dong-u

amp Kim Su-yeop

(1998)

radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(1998) radic radic radic

Jeong Tae-won amp

Kwak Gyu-seok

(2001)

radic

Kum Jong-su

(2001) radic radic radic radic

Kim Jin-gu(2002) radic radic radic

Yeo Gi-tae(2002) radic radic

Lirn(2003-2004) radic radic radic

Pater(2004) radic

Jang Yeong-tae

(2005) radic radic radic

Han Cheol-hwan

(2005) radic radic radic

Heo Yun-su

(2005) radic radic radic radic

Kim Geun-seop

(2007) radic radic radic radic

Oh Ga-yeong

(2008) radic

32

33 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green

Port Construction

Following the research above Port facilities rates and charges inland

connection and social circumstance are chose in this study port selection and

competitiveness department

e-RTGC Electric rubber tired gantry crane is a mobile gantry crane used for

stacking intermodal containers within the stacking areas of a container terminal

e-RTGC are used at container terminals and container storage yards to straddling

multiple lanes of railroad and container storage or when maximum storage

density in the container stack is desired

AMP is shorted for Alternative Marine Power and Itrsquos a facility which

provides the electric system in the land for ship which entry in the port The

facility can reduce emissions which ship get entrance in the port

AGV is a mobile robot that follows markers or wires in the floor or uses

vision or lasers They are most often used in industrial applications to move

materials around a manufacturing facility or a warehouse Automatic Guided

Vehicle systems work around-the-clock making continuous flow and just-in-time

delivery easier to achieve Application of the automatic guided vehicle has broade

33

ned during the late 20th century and they are no longer restricted to industrial

environments

The e-RTGC AMP and AGV are the new clean facilities and equipments in the

Green Port they donrsquot reduce the efficiency of handling cargo and they also

reduce the CO2 emission account

Green ship certification system if a ship utilizes clean and CO2 emission

reduction technology on the ship building adds equipment and management and

son on certification would be received And the port authority gives some

incentive and preferential treatment among 45 ports Such as a better schedule is

provided for green membership ship priority in handing cargo and discount on

entrance fee

Incentives on the new cleaning technology There are two expressions about

this measure one is that the port authority give a incentive to ship which have a

great utilization on the new cleaning technology and the other one is that

environment provide many incentives to the authority which utilize the new

cleaning technology in the port such as LED street lamp solar power cranes

Green flag The Green Flag incentive program was set up to encourage ships to

slow down in order to improve air quality The Green Flag program provides

approximately $2 million a year in discounts for vessel operators who slow their

ships to 12 knots (22kmh) or less within 20miles (32km) of the harbor

34

According to the Port the Green Flag program reduced air pollution by 600tons in

2007 and is expected to do better in 2008

All of Green ship certification system incentives on the new cleaning

technology and Green Flag are incentives provided for users of port and aimed at

reduce port rates and charges So the 3 measures belong to affect port rates and

charges

Eco-friendly transport means conversion Eco-friendly means of transport are

much accounted of green port for example railway discharge less GHG emission

than truck barge with a clean engine among the river and inshore canal

Joint distribution joint distribution is a collaborative system which port

provides among many logistics companies It can make the cargo handling speed

rapidly and reduce cargo storage time for CO2 emission reducing such as

refrigerated container In an addition it also makes the logistics companies

transport more efficient

Cost on amount of CO2 emission differenced from other port the cost on

amount of CO2 is included in the port cost The cost aims to reduce the CO2

emission directly

CO2 emission reduction policies compared with other traditional port Green

Port gives more cost discount and incentives but in an addition there are many

policies on CO2 emission restriction Such as aging trucks restrictions in inland

transport department ship entry speed reduced and fuel changed in the ship

35

department and so on Whether these restriction policies constrain port

development or not and the degree of these policies constrain port development

will be explain by the AHP results

Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors some ports in the

western countries are opened as a travel place for visitors so as to change the

polluted impress and raise the position in our heart

Cost on amount of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction policies and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors can affect the social

circumstance factor Whether these measures can or not improve the social

circumstance and port competitiveness we have to see the next calculation and

results

36

Chapter 4 The Green Port Competitiveness

Analysis

41 The Green Port Competitiveness Model by AHP

The AHP is one multi-criteria decision making method which has been

extensively applied to a variety of decision-making situations The multi-criteria

techniques are considered to be a promising framework for evaluation of

decision-making factors since they have the potential to take into account

conflicting multidimensional incommensurable and uncertain effects of

decisions explicitly

In order to apply the AHP method a hierarchical decision schema was

constructed by decomposing the decision problem into its decision elements

37

After that the importance or preferences of the decision elements are examined in

a pair-wise comparison to the elements in the hierarchy The parameters are

estimated using pair-wise comparisons between the importance of the attribute or

decision element in the function using data made by each responder Making

comparisons is a question of which of the two attributes is more import as well as

how much more important

Follow these theories the Green Port Competitiveness Model choose factors as

follow in port competitiveness factors part there are port facilities port rates and

charges inland connection social circumstance in Green Port construction part

there are e-RTGC AMP AGV green ship certification system green flag

incentives on the new cleaning technology eco-friendly transport means

conversion joint distribution CO2 emission reduction policies cost on amount of

CO2 emission beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

38

Figure 41 Green Port Competitiveness AHP model

Follow the Green Port Competitiveness AHP as shown we set a questionnaire

survey to many experts scholars working in logistics system area And we got 15

ones and 14 ones results are believable and integrated

42 Green Port Competitiveness Analysis

39

The key to construction of the factors which affects the port competitiveness

is to determine the conceptual model The selection of the factors directly affects

the evaluation of the result In order to ensure the accuracy objectivity and

practicality of evaluation results the following basic principles must be followed

when selecting factors systematic principles the principle of universal

comparability practical principle and goal-oriented principle In view of the

foregoing the competitiveness which affected by Green Port construction model

is made The analysis follows established principles of port competitiveness

evaluation taking into account the characteristics and functions of the port as well

as port facilities port services port rates and charges ship entrance inland

connection social circumstances and so on

(1) Port facilities

e-RTGC U11 AMP U12 AGV U13

(2) Port rates and charges

Green ship certification system U21 Incentives on the new clean

technology U22 Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

(3) Inland connection

Eco-friendly means of transport U31 Joint distribution U32

(4) Social circumstances

40

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41 CO2 emission reduction policies

U42 Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors U43

Table 421 Details of Level I and Level II values

Level I

indicators Symbol Level II indicators Symbol

Port facilities A1

e-RTGC U11

AMP U12

AGV U13

Port rates and

charges A2

Green ship certification system U21

Incentives on the new clean technology U22

Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

Inland

connection A3

Eco-friendly means of transport U31

Joint distribution U32

Social

circumstances A4

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41

CO2 emissions reduction policies U42

Beautiful environment construction in inner

harbors U43

41

I Determination of level I indicator weights

As the ports competitiveness evaluation indicators at this level are complex

and the elements are not easily quantified AHP is adopted to determine the

indicator weights with the basic steps as follows

(1) Establish a comparative judgment matrix The comparative judgment

matrix is obtained through comparing contributed proportion of multiple

indicators to the overall target by the judgment scale wherein the fuzzy

judgment number introduced is 1 3 5 7 and 9 and the reciprocal of

such number indicates the important degree of one element relatively to

another The results are shown in next table

Table 422 Comparison matrix of level I indicators

A1 A2 A3 A4

A1 1 15 13 3

A2 5 1 3 7

A3 3 13 1 5

A4 13 17 15 1

(2) Calculate the characteristic vector of the comparative judgment matrix

which refers to the weighted vector of the indicator The writer adopts

42

the geometric method to calculate the characteristic vector The

calculated result is as follows

ω=(012 0560 026 006)T λmax=418 It can be obtained from the table

RI=09 Wherein ω is the characteristic vector corresponding to the

maximum characteristic value λmax of the comparative judgment matrix

namely the weighted vector of the indicator RI is the average

consistency indicator as shown in following table

Table423 Average random consistency indicator RI

Matrix Order

RI

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

0 0 058 09 112 124 132 141

Matrix Order

RI

9 10 11 12 13 14 15

145 149 152 154 156 158 159

(3) Conduct consistency check on the comparative judgment matrix Adopt

the random consistency proportion CR to judge the consistency of the

comparative judgment matrix According to CI= (λmax -n)(n-1) and

CR=CIRI it can be obtained through calculation CR=007lt01 Thus

this comparative judgment matrix has a satisfactory consistency and the

indicator weight coefficient calculated through this matrix is acceptable

43

II Determination of level II indicator weights

The data at this level are the details of level Ⅰ indicator The judgment

matrix obtained through comparing multiple sub-indicators under Level Ⅰ

indicators is adopted to determine the weights of sub-indicators under each

indicator one by one The specific steps are as follows

(1) The experts score the weights within the given range To determine the

weights of several small indicators under the same big indicator it is

supposed that the score of small indicator ｋ under the indicator j made

by the expert i is Xijk wherein i=12n n is the total number of

experts ј=12m m is the total number of LevelⅡ indicator к

=12Oj Oj is the number of small indicators under the big indicator ј

іјк IJK LRC l I j k

(2) The credit rating of the expert і is l l =1 2 3 l =1 indicates this expert

is quite familiar with the evaluated contents l =2 indicator this expert is

44

with the evaluated contents l =3 indicates this expert is not quite familiar

with the evaluated contents yi1 is the=08 yi2 =05 and yi3=1

(3) The comprehensive evaluation score of small indicator l under the

indicator j is as follows

(4) The formula for normalization processing of indicator weights is as

follows and the absolute weight of the indicator set is marked as

q=(q1q2q11)

(5) Because of the same justification and principle we donrsquot give the detail

about the calculation The same with the level Ⅰ calculation we

manipulation data one by one and get 14 results And obtain the average

45

results by weighted average method The results detail as Table for the

final weights of Level-Ⅱ evaluation indicators

Above the calculation process and method are just one of data from the

questionable surveys In this study the final results are got from the

weighted average by the results of each questionable survey

The final results are shown as Table424

Table424 Indicator weights table of indicator system

Level I

indicators Weight LevelⅡ indicators

Relative

weight

Absolute

weight

Importance

percentage

Port Facilities

A1 02735

e-RTGC U11 05506 01506 1506

AMP U12 01648 00451 451

AGV U13 02826 00773 773

Port Rates and

Charges A2

02902

Green ship certification s

ystem U21 04724 01371 1371

Incentives on the new

clean technology U22 02871 00833 833

Green Flag (speed

reduction incentive)U23 02405 00698 698

Inland

connection A3

02865

Eco-friendly means of

transport U31 05942 01702 1702

Joint distribution U32 04058 01163 1163

Social

environmentA4 00863

Cost on amount of CO2

emission U41 03698 00319 319

CO2 emissions reduction

policies U42 02273 00196 196

Beautiful environment

construction in inner

harbors U43

04029 00348 348

46

III Case study

In the questionable survey we also got the mark of Green Port measures

evaluation value of many main ports such as Singapore Port Shanghai Port

Hongkong Port Busan Port LALB Port Rotterdam Port and Yocohama Port

The highest mark is 5 and lowest one is 1

Table425 Evaluation value of many main ports

Singapore

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

LALB

Port

Rotterdam

Port

Yocohama

Port

Port facilities 38000 36000 34000 38182 38000 42000 32000

Port rates and

charges 32000 36000 31000 35455 32000 39000 33000

Inland

connection 39000 34545 35000 29091 35000 45000 36000

Social

circumstance 42000 32727 41000 32000 38000 42727 36000

With the Green Port and Port competitiveness indicator weights results these

ports got the final evaluation value

47

Table426 Final evaluation value on main ports Green Port measures and

competitiveness

Rotterdam

Port

Singapore

Port

LALB

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

Yocohama

Port

394 345 330 330 319 318 317

43 Results Analysis

From the results table we can obtain the many results as following

① The main Green Port measures which are more important to improve port

competitiveness are Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system the indicator weights are 01702 01506 and

01371 among the 11 indicators

② In the Green Port construction Cost on amount of CO2 emission and CO2

emissions reduction policies are the restrictions indicators but the weight

of two indicators are not big 00319 and 00196 So effect on Green Port

construction to port competitiveness does have the weaken capacity but

not clearly strengthen more clearly Thus Green Port construction really

could improve the port competitiveness

48

③ In the case study traditional ports Rotterdam and Singapore Port give us

better examples on Green Port construction especially Rotterdam Port

④ Hongkong Busan and Yocohama Port all got a lower evaluation value

But in detail Hongkong and Yocohama Port got a lower on the port

facilities and rates and charges Busan Port got a higher on the port

facilities and rates and charges but a lower on the inland connection and

social circumstance

⑤ Shanghai Port doesnrsquot have Particular strength factors but the

comprehensive strength is not bad the same as LALB Port

49

Chapter 5 Conclusion

In this thesis the effects of Green Port construction for improving the port

competitiveness have been studied Under the definition of Green Port the

characteristics of Green Port and its effects has been shown by analysing the AHP

method which based on the questionary survey for Green Port specialists and port

officers

Follow the results of analysis on Green Port competitiveness AHP model

Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green ship certification system is

better for Green Port Construction welcome for shipping companies and citizens

who live around the port And in the analysis of Port competitiveness factors port

rates and charges always affects port competitiveness a lot As a trend inland

connection factor abstracts more attention of shipping companies

50

On the trend of port department each port should take a activity to adjust

strategy for improving its competitiveness Such as in the main ports evaluation

Busan port get a high value on port rates and charges and port facilities but as a

lower value on inland connection factor the final value is not as well as we look

forward In the evaluation of Singapore Port through it gets a lower value on rates

and charges higher value on inland connection and social circumstance causes the

final value are better So the Green Port Construction may be a trend in port

department

In the results of this thesis Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system are better solutions for Green Port Construction And

especially it can be verified that the port rates and charges always affects port

competitiveness Futhermore the investment for Green Port construction and its

effects have to be verified in the future

51

References

1 Hoyle B S and Smith J 1992 Transport and Development In Modern

transport geography edited by B S Hoyle R D Knowles (London Belhaven

Press)pp11-31

2 Beresford A K C De Souza A J R G and Pettit S J 2005 Stategic

development of liner shipping companies and terminal operators Ocean yearbook

19(Chicago 1L The University of Chicago Press) pp 732-750

3 Heaver T D 2002 Supply chain and logistics management implications for

liner shipping In The handbook of maritime economics and business edited by C

Grammenos (LondonLLP) pp 375-396

4 Park T E (2011) A Study on selection criteria of Green Port and evaluation of

major Korean port A masters thesis of graduate school of Incheon university

52

5 JeongBH (2009)Green port management policy directions in the green

growth era- The case of Gwangyang port in Republic of Korea Journal of Korea

Port Economic Association Vol25(3) p361-384

6 Lee J S Han N H(2009) A study on Green Port Revitalization According to

Air Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

7 Lee Y K Nan J W(2010)Green Logistics Policy Analysis and Implications

of Japan

8 Lee B S (2010)Tendency and Countermeasures on Green Logistics in Port

Logistics Company A masters thesis of graduate school of Korean Maritime

university

9 Lee J S (2009) A Study on Green Port Revitalization According to Air

Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

10 Zhang F Y Li Z Lu X J Yao X L(2008)Competitiveness of Inland

Ports Based on F-AHP

11 Port of Long Beach (2009) Green Port Policy wwwpolbcom

12 The port of Los Angeles wwwportoflosangelesorg

32

33 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green

Port Construction

Following the research above Port facilities rates and charges inland

connection and social circumstance are chose in this study port selection and

competitiveness department

e-RTGC Electric rubber tired gantry crane is a mobile gantry crane used for

stacking intermodal containers within the stacking areas of a container terminal

e-RTGC are used at container terminals and container storage yards to straddling

multiple lanes of railroad and container storage or when maximum storage

density in the container stack is desired

AMP is shorted for Alternative Marine Power and Itrsquos a facility which

provides the electric system in the land for ship which entry in the port The

facility can reduce emissions which ship get entrance in the port

AGV is a mobile robot that follows markers or wires in the floor or uses

vision or lasers They are most often used in industrial applications to move

materials around a manufacturing facility or a warehouse Automatic Guided

Vehicle systems work around-the-clock making continuous flow and just-in-time

delivery easier to achieve Application of the automatic guided vehicle has broade

33

ned during the late 20th century and they are no longer restricted to industrial

environments

The e-RTGC AMP and AGV are the new clean facilities and equipments in the

Green Port they donrsquot reduce the efficiency of handling cargo and they also

reduce the CO2 emission account

Green ship certification system if a ship utilizes clean and CO2 emission

reduction technology on the ship building adds equipment and management and

son on certification would be received And the port authority gives some

incentive and preferential treatment among 45 ports Such as a better schedule is

provided for green membership ship priority in handing cargo and discount on

entrance fee

Incentives on the new cleaning technology There are two expressions about

this measure one is that the port authority give a incentive to ship which have a

great utilization on the new cleaning technology and the other one is that

environment provide many incentives to the authority which utilize the new

cleaning technology in the port such as LED street lamp solar power cranes

Green flag The Green Flag incentive program was set up to encourage ships to

slow down in order to improve air quality The Green Flag program provides

approximately $2 million a year in discounts for vessel operators who slow their

ships to 12 knots (22kmh) or less within 20miles (32km) of the harbor

34

According to the Port the Green Flag program reduced air pollution by 600tons in

2007 and is expected to do better in 2008

All of Green ship certification system incentives on the new cleaning

technology and Green Flag are incentives provided for users of port and aimed at

reduce port rates and charges So the 3 measures belong to affect port rates and

charges

Eco-friendly transport means conversion Eco-friendly means of transport are

much accounted of green port for example railway discharge less GHG emission

than truck barge with a clean engine among the river and inshore canal

Joint distribution joint distribution is a collaborative system which port

provides among many logistics companies It can make the cargo handling speed

rapidly and reduce cargo storage time for CO2 emission reducing such as

refrigerated container In an addition it also makes the logistics companies

transport more efficient

Cost on amount of CO2 emission differenced from other port the cost on

amount of CO2 is included in the port cost The cost aims to reduce the CO2

emission directly

CO2 emission reduction policies compared with other traditional port Green

Port gives more cost discount and incentives but in an addition there are many

policies on CO2 emission restriction Such as aging trucks restrictions in inland

transport department ship entry speed reduced and fuel changed in the ship

35

department and so on Whether these restriction policies constrain port

development or not and the degree of these policies constrain port development

will be explain by the AHP results

Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors some ports in the

western countries are opened as a travel place for visitors so as to change the

polluted impress and raise the position in our heart

Cost on amount of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction policies and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors can affect the social

circumstance factor Whether these measures can or not improve the social

circumstance and port competitiveness we have to see the next calculation and

results

36

Chapter 4 The Green Port Competitiveness

Analysis

41 The Green Port Competitiveness Model by AHP

The AHP is one multi-criteria decision making method which has been

extensively applied to a variety of decision-making situations The multi-criteria

techniques are considered to be a promising framework for evaluation of

decision-making factors since they have the potential to take into account

conflicting multidimensional incommensurable and uncertain effects of

decisions explicitly

In order to apply the AHP method a hierarchical decision schema was

constructed by decomposing the decision problem into its decision elements

37

After that the importance or preferences of the decision elements are examined in

a pair-wise comparison to the elements in the hierarchy The parameters are

estimated using pair-wise comparisons between the importance of the attribute or

decision element in the function using data made by each responder Making

comparisons is a question of which of the two attributes is more import as well as

how much more important

Follow these theories the Green Port Competitiveness Model choose factors as

follow in port competitiveness factors part there are port facilities port rates and

charges inland connection social circumstance in Green Port construction part

there are e-RTGC AMP AGV green ship certification system green flag

incentives on the new cleaning technology eco-friendly transport means

conversion joint distribution CO2 emission reduction policies cost on amount of

CO2 emission beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

38

Figure 41 Green Port Competitiveness AHP model

Follow the Green Port Competitiveness AHP as shown we set a questionnaire

survey to many experts scholars working in logistics system area And we got 15

ones and 14 ones results are believable and integrated

42 Green Port Competitiveness Analysis

39

The key to construction of the factors which affects the port competitiveness

is to determine the conceptual model The selection of the factors directly affects

the evaluation of the result In order to ensure the accuracy objectivity and

practicality of evaluation results the following basic principles must be followed

when selecting factors systematic principles the principle of universal

comparability practical principle and goal-oriented principle In view of the

foregoing the competitiveness which affected by Green Port construction model

is made The analysis follows established principles of port competitiveness

evaluation taking into account the characteristics and functions of the port as well

as port facilities port services port rates and charges ship entrance inland

connection social circumstances and so on

(1) Port facilities

e-RTGC U11 AMP U12 AGV U13

(2) Port rates and charges

Green ship certification system U21 Incentives on the new clean

technology U22 Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

(3) Inland connection

Eco-friendly means of transport U31 Joint distribution U32

(4) Social circumstances

40

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41 CO2 emission reduction policies

U42 Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors U43

Table 421 Details of Level I and Level II values

Level I

indicators Symbol Level II indicators Symbol

Port facilities A1

e-RTGC U11

AMP U12

AGV U13

Port rates and

charges A2

Green ship certification system U21

Incentives on the new clean technology U22

Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

Inland

connection A3

Eco-friendly means of transport U31

Joint distribution U32

Social

circumstances A4

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41

CO2 emissions reduction policies U42

Beautiful environment construction in inner

harbors U43

41

I Determination of level I indicator weights

As the ports competitiveness evaluation indicators at this level are complex

and the elements are not easily quantified AHP is adopted to determine the

indicator weights with the basic steps as follows

(1) Establish a comparative judgment matrix The comparative judgment

matrix is obtained through comparing contributed proportion of multiple

indicators to the overall target by the judgment scale wherein the fuzzy

judgment number introduced is 1 3 5 7 and 9 and the reciprocal of

such number indicates the important degree of one element relatively to

another The results are shown in next table

Table 422 Comparison matrix of level I indicators

A1 A2 A3 A4

A1 1 15 13 3

A2 5 1 3 7

A3 3 13 1 5

A4 13 17 15 1

(2) Calculate the characteristic vector of the comparative judgment matrix

which refers to the weighted vector of the indicator The writer adopts

42

the geometric method to calculate the characteristic vector The

calculated result is as follows

ω=(012 0560 026 006)T λmax=418 It can be obtained from the table

RI=09 Wherein ω is the characteristic vector corresponding to the

maximum characteristic value λmax of the comparative judgment matrix

namely the weighted vector of the indicator RI is the average

consistency indicator as shown in following table

Table423 Average random consistency indicator RI

Matrix Order

RI

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

0 0 058 09 112 124 132 141

Matrix Order

RI

9 10 11 12 13 14 15

145 149 152 154 156 158 159

(3) Conduct consistency check on the comparative judgment matrix Adopt

the random consistency proportion CR to judge the consistency of the

comparative judgment matrix According to CI= (λmax -n)(n-1) and

CR=CIRI it can be obtained through calculation CR=007lt01 Thus

this comparative judgment matrix has a satisfactory consistency and the

indicator weight coefficient calculated through this matrix is acceptable

43

II Determination of level II indicator weights

The data at this level are the details of level Ⅰ indicator The judgment

matrix obtained through comparing multiple sub-indicators under Level Ⅰ

indicators is adopted to determine the weights of sub-indicators under each

indicator one by one The specific steps are as follows

(1) The experts score the weights within the given range To determine the

weights of several small indicators under the same big indicator it is

supposed that the score of small indicator ｋ under the indicator j made

by the expert i is Xijk wherein i=12n n is the total number of

experts ј=12m m is the total number of LevelⅡ indicator к

=12Oj Oj is the number of small indicators under the big indicator ј

іјк IJK LRC l I j k

(2) The credit rating of the expert і is l l =1 2 3 l =1 indicates this expert

is quite familiar with the evaluated contents l =2 indicator this expert is

44

with the evaluated contents l =3 indicates this expert is not quite familiar

with the evaluated contents yi1 is the=08 yi2 =05 and yi3=1

(3) The comprehensive evaluation score of small indicator l under the

indicator j is as follows

(4) The formula for normalization processing of indicator weights is as

follows and the absolute weight of the indicator set is marked as

q=(q1q2q11)

(5) Because of the same justification and principle we donrsquot give the detail

about the calculation The same with the level Ⅰ calculation we

manipulation data one by one and get 14 results And obtain the average

45

results by weighted average method The results detail as Table for the

final weights of Level-Ⅱ evaluation indicators

Above the calculation process and method are just one of data from the

questionable surveys In this study the final results are got from the

weighted average by the results of each questionable survey

The final results are shown as Table424

Table424 Indicator weights table of indicator system

Level I

indicators Weight LevelⅡ indicators

Relative

weight

Absolute

weight

Importance

percentage

Port Facilities

A1 02735

e-RTGC U11 05506 01506 1506

AMP U12 01648 00451 451

AGV U13 02826 00773 773

Port Rates and

Charges A2

02902

Green ship certification s

ystem U21 04724 01371 1371

Incentives on the new

clean technology U22 02871 00833 833

Green Flag (speed

reduction incentive)U23 02405 00698 698

Inland

connection A3

02865

Eco-friendly means of

transport U31 05942 01702 1702

Joint distribution U32 04058 01163 1163

Social

environmentA4 00863

Cost on amount of CO2

emission U41 03698 00319 319

CO2 emissions reduction

policies U42 02273 00196 196

Beautiful environment

construction in inner

harbors U43

04029 00348 348

46

III Case study

In the questionable survey we also got the mark of Green Port measures

evaluation value of many main ports such as Singapore Port Shanghai Port

Hongkong Port Busan Port LALB Port Rotterdam Port and Yocohama Port

The highest mark is 5 and lowest one is 1

Table425 Evaluation value of many main ports

Singapore

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

LALB

Port

Rotterdam

Port

Yocohama

Port

Port facilities 38000 36000 34000 38182 38000 42000 32000

Port rates and

charges 32000 36000 31000 35455 32000 39000 33000

Inland

connection 39000 34545 35000 29091 35000 45000 36000

Social

circumstance 42000 32727 41000 32000 38000 42727 36000

With the Green Port and Port competitiveness indicator weights results these

ports got the final evaluation value

47

Table426 Final evaluation value on main ports Green Port measures and

competitiveness

Rotterdam

Port

Singapore

Port

LALB

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

Yocohama

Port

394 345 330 330 319 318 317

43 Results Analysis

From the results table we can obtain the many results as following

① The main Green Port measures which are more important to improve port

competitiveness are Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system the indicator weights are 01702 01506 and

01371 among the 11 indicators

② In the Green Port construction Cost on amount of CO2 emission and CO2

emissions reduction policies are the restrictions indicators but the weight

of two indicators are not big 00319 and 00196 So effect on Green Port

construction to port competitiveness does have the weaken capacity but

not clearly strengthen more clearly Thus Green Port construction really

could improve the port competitiveness

48

③ In the case study traditional ports Rotterdam and Singapore Port give us

better examples on Green Port construction especially Rotterdam Port

④ Hongkong Busan and Yocohama Port all got a lower evaluation value

But in detail Hongkong and Yocohama Port got a lower on the port

facilities and rates and charges Busan Port got a higher on the port

facilities and rates and charges but a lower on the inland connection and

social circumstance

⑤ Shanghai Port doesnrsquot have Particular strength factors but the

comprehensive strength is not bad the same as LALB Port

49

Chapter 5 Conclusion

In this thesis the effects of Green Port construction for improving the port

competitiveness have been studied Under the definition of Green Port the

characteristics of Green Port and its effects has been shown by analysing the AHP

method which based on the questionary survey for Green Port specialists and port

officers

Follow the results of analysis on Green Port competitiveness AHP model

Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green ship certification system is

better for Green Port Construction welcome for shipping companies and citizens

who live around the port And in the analysis of Port competitiveness factors port

rates and charges always affects port competitiveness a lot As a trend inland

connection factor abstracts more attention of shipping companies

50

On the trend of port department each port should take a activity to adjust

strategy for improving its competitiveness Such as in the main ports evaluation

Busan port get a high value on port rates and charges and port facilities but as a

lower value on inland connection factor the final value is not as well as we look

forward In the evaluation of Singapore Port through it gets a lower value on rates

and charges higher value on inland connection and social circumstance causes the

final value are better So the Green Port Construction may be a trend in port

department

In the results of this thesis Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system are better solutions for Green Port Construction And

especially it can be verified that the port rates and charges always affects port

competitiveness Futhermore the investment for Green Port construction and its

effects have to be verified in the future

51

References

1 Hoyle B S and Smith J 1992 Transport and Development In Modern

transport geography edited by B S Hoyle R D Knowles (London Belhaven

Press)pp11-31

2 Beresford A K C De Souza A J R G and Pettit S J 2005 Stategic

development of liner shipping companies and terminal operators Ocean yearbook

19(Chicago 1L The University of Chicago Press) pp 732-750

3 Heaver T D 2002 Supply chain and logistics management implications for

liner shipping In The handbook of maritime economics and business edited by C

Grammenos (LondonLLP) pp 375-396

4 Park T E (2011) A Study on selection criteria of Green Port and evaluation of

major Korean port A masters thesis of graduate school of Incheon university

52

5 JeongBH (2009)Green port management policy directions in the green

growth era- The case of Gwangyang port in Republic of Korea Journal of Korea

Port Economic Association Vol25(3) p361-384

6 Lee J S Han N H(2009) A study on Green Port Revitalization According to

Air Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

7 Lee Y K Nan J W(2010)Green Logistics Policy Analysis and Implications

of Japan

8 Lee B S (2010)Tendency and Countermeasures on Green Logistics in Port

Logistics Company A masters thesis of graduate school of Korean Maritime

university

9 Lee J S (2009) A Study on Green Port Revitalization According to Air

Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

10 Zhang F Y Li Z Lu X J Yao X L(2008)Competitiveness of Inland

Ports Based on F-AHP

11 Port of Long Beach (2009) Green Port Policy wwwpolbcom

12 The port of Los Angeles wwwportoflosangelesorg

33

ned during the late 20th century and they are no longer restricted to industrial

environments

The e-RTGC AMP and AGV are the new clean facilities and equipments in the

Green Port they donrsquot reduce the efficiency of handling cargo and they also

reduce the CO2 emission account

Green ship certification system if a ship utilizes clean and CO2 emission

reduction technology on the ship building adds equipment and management and

son on certification would be received And the port authority gives some

incentive and preferential treatment among 45 ports Such as a better schedule is

provided for green membership ship priority in handing cargo and discount on

entrance fee

Incentives on the new cleaning technology There are two expressions about

this measure one is that the port authority give a incentive to ship which have a

great utilization on the new cleaning technology and the other one is that

environment provide many incentives to the authority which utilize the new

cleaning technology in the port such as LED street lamp solar power cranes

Green flag The Green Flag incentive program was set up to encourage ships to

slow down in order to improve air quality The Green Flag program provides

approximately $2 million a year in discounts for vessel operators who slow their

ships to 12 knots (22kmh) or less within 20miles (32km) of the harbor

34

According to the Port the Green Flag program reduced air pollution by 600tons in

2007 and is expected to do better in 2008

All of Green ship certification system incentives on the new cleaning

technology and Green Flag are incentives provided for users of port and aimed at

reduce port rates and charges So the 3 measures belong to affect port rates and

charges

Eco-friendly transport means conversion Eco-friendly means of transport are

much accounted of green port for example railway discharge less GHG emission

than truck barge with a clean engine among the river and inshore canal

Joint distribution joint distribution is a collaborative system which port

provides among many logistics companies It can make the cargo handling speed

rapidly and reduce cargo storage time for CO2 emission reducing such as

refrigerated container In an addition it also makes the logistics companies

transport more efficient

Cost on amount of CO2 emission differenced from other port the cost on

amount of CO2 is included in the port cost The cost aims to reduce the CO2

emission directly

CO2 emission reduction policies compared with other traditional port Green

Port gives more cost discount and incentives but in an addition there are many

policies on CO2 emission restriction Such as aging trucks restrictions in inland

transport department ship entry speed reduced and fuel changed in the ship

35

department and so on Whether these restriction policies constrain port

development or not and the degree of these policies constrain port development

will be explain by the AHP results

Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors some ports in the

western countries are opened as a travel place for visitors so as to change the

polluted impress and raise the position in our heart

Cost on amount of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction policies and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors can affect the social

circumstance factor Whether these measures can or not improve the social

circumstance and port competitiveness we have to see the next calculation and

results

36

Chapter 4 The Green Port Competitiveness

Analysis

41 The Green Port Competitiveness Model by AHP

The AHP is one multi-criteria decision making method which has been

extensively applied to a variety of decision-making situations The multi-criteria

techniques are considered to be a promising framework for evaluation of

decision-making factors since they have the potential to take into account

conflicting multidimensional incommensurable and uncertain effects of

decisions explicitly

In order to apply the AHP method a hierarchical decision schema was

constructed by decomposing the decision problem into its decision elements

37

After that the importance or preferences of the decision elements are examined in

a pair-wise comparison to the elements in the hierarchy The parameters are

estimated using pair-wise comparisons between the importance of the attribute or

decision element in the function using data made by each responder Making

comparisons is a question of which of the two attributes is more import as well as

how much more important

Follow these theories the Green Port Competitiveness Model choose factors as

follow in port competitiveness factors part there are port facilities port rates and

charges inland connection social circumstance in Green Port construction part

there are e-RTGC AMP AGV green ship certification system green flag

incentives on the new cleaning technology eco-friendly transport means

conversion joint distribution CO2 emission reduction policies cost on amount of

CO2 emission beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

38

Figure 41 Green Port Competitiveness AHP model

Follow the Green Port Competitiveness AHP as shown we set a questionnaire

survey to many experts scholars working in logistics system area And we got 15

ones and 14 ones results are believable and integrated

42 Green Port Competitiveness Analysis

39

The key to construction of the factors which affects the port competitiveness

is to determine the conceptual model The selection of the factors directly affects

the evaluation of the result In order to ensure the accuracy objectivity and

practicality of evaluation results the following basic principles must be followed

when selecting factors systematic principles the principle of universal

comparability practical principle and goal-oriented principle In view of the

foregoing the competitiveness which affected by Green Port construction model

is made The analysis follows established principles of port competitiveness

evaluation taking into account the characteristics and functions of the port as well

as port facilities port services port rates and charges ship entrance inland

connection social circumstances and so on

(1) Port facilities

e-RTGC U11 AMP U12 AGV U13

(2) Port rates and charges

Green ship certification system U21 Incentives on the new clean

technology U22 Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

(3) Inland connection

Eco-friendly means of transport U31 Joint distribution U32

(4) Social circumstances

40

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41 CO2 emission reduction policies

U42 Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors U43

Table 421 Details of Level I and Level II values

Level I

indicators Symbol Level II indicators Symbol

Port facilities A1

e-RTGC U11

AMP U12

AGV U13

Port rates and

charges A2

Green ship certification system U21

Incentives on the new clean technology U22

Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

Inland

connection A3

Eco-friendly means of transport U31

Joint distribution U32

Social

circumstances A4

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41

CO2 emissions reduction policies U42

Beautiful environment construction in inner

harbors U43

41

I Determination of level I indicator weights

As the ports competitiveness evaluation indicators at this level are complex

and the elements are not easily quantified AHP is adopted to determine the

indicator weights with the basic steps as follows

(1) Establish a comparative judgment matrix The comparative judgment

matrix is obtained through comparing contributed proportion of multiple

indicators to the overall target by the judgment scale wherein the fuzzy

judgment number introduced is 1 3 5 7 and 9 and the reciprocal of

such number indicates the important degree of one element relatively to

another The results are shown in next table

Table 422 Comparison matrix of level I indicators

A1 A2 A3 A4

A1 1 15 13 3

A2 5 1 3 7

A3 3 13 1 5

A4 13 17 15 1

(2) Calculate the characteristic vector of the comparative judgment matrix

which refers to the weighted vector of the indicator The writer adopts

42

the geometric method to calculate the characteristic vector The

calculated result is as follows

ω=(012 0560 026 006)T λmax=418 It can be obtained from the table

RI=09 Wherein ω is the characteristic vector corresponding to the

maximum characteristic value λmax of the comparative judgment matrix

namely the weighted vector of the indicator RI is the average

consistency indicator as shown in following table

Table423 Average random consistency indicator RI

Matrix Order

RI

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

0 0 058 09 112 124 132 141

Matrix Order

RI

9 10 11 12 13 14 15

145 149 152 154 156 158 159

(3) Conduct consistency check on the comparative judgment matrix Adopt

the random consistency proportion CR to judge the consistency of the

comparative judgment matrix According to CI= (λmax -n)(n-1) and

CR=CIRI it can be obtained through calculation CR=007lt01 Thus

this comparative judgment matrix has a satisfactory consistency and the

indicator weight coefficient calculated through this matrix is acceptable

43

II Determination of level II indicator weights

The data at this level are the details of level Ⅰ indicator The judgment

matrix obtained through comparing multiple sub-indicators under Level Ⅰ

indicators is adopted to determine the weights of sub-indicators under each

indicator one by one The specific steps are as follows

(1) The experts score the weights within the given range To determine the

weights of several small indicators under the same big indicator it is

supposed that the score of small indicator ｋ under the indicator j made

by the expert i is Xijk wherein i=12n n is the total number of

experts ј=12m m is the total number of LevelⅡ indicator к

=12Oj Oj is the number of small indicators under the big indicator ј

іјк IJK LRC l I j k

(2) The credit rating of the expert і is l l =1 2 3 l =1 indicates this expert

is quite familiar with the evaluated contents l =2 indicator this expert is

44

with the evaluated contents l =3 indicates this expert is not quite familiar

with the evaluated contents yi1 is the=08 yi2 =05 and yi3=1

(3) The comprehensive evaluation score of small indicator l under the

indicator j is as follows

(4) The formula for normalization processing of indicator weights is as

follows and the absolute weight of the indicator set is marked as

q=(q1q2q11)

(5) Because of the same justification and principle we donrsquot give the detail

about the calculation The same with the level Ⅰ calculation we

manipulation data one by one and get 14 results And obtain the average

45

results by weighted average method The results detail as Table for the

final weights of Level-Ⅱ evaluation indicators

Above the calculation process and method are just one of data from the

questionable surveys In this study the final results are got from the

weighted average by the results of each questionable survey

The final results are shown as Table424

Table424 Indicator weights table of indicator system

Level I

indicators Weight LevelⅡ indicators

Relative

weight

Absolute

weight

Importance

percentage

Port Facilities

A1 02735

e-RTGC U11 05506 01506 1506

AMP U12 01648 00451 451

AGV U13 02826 00773 773

Port Rates and

Charges A2

02902

Green ship certification s

ystem U21 04724 01371 1371

Incentives on the new

clean technology U22 02871 00833 833

Green Flag (speed

reduction incentive)U23 02405 00698 698

Inland

connection A3

02865

Eco-friendly means of

transport U31 05942 01702 1702

Joint distribution U32 04058 01163 1163

Social

environmentA4 00863

Cost on amount of CO2

emission U41 03698 00319 319

CO2 emissions reduction

policies U42 02273 00196 196

Beautiful environment

construction in inner

harbors U43

04029 00348 348

46

III Case study

In the questionable survey we also got the mark of Green Port measures

evaluation value of many main ports such as Singapore Port Shanghai Port

Hongkong Port Busan Port LALB Port Rotterdam Port and Yocohama Port

The highest mark is 5 and lowest one is 1

Table425 Evaluation value of many main ports

Singapore

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

LALB

Port

Rotterdam

Port

Yocohama

Port

Port facilities 38000 36000 34000 38182 38000 42000 32000

Port rates and

charges 32000 36000 31000 35455 32000 39000 33000

Inland

connection 39000 34545 35000 29091 35000 45000 36000

Social

circumstance 42000 32727 41000 32000 38000 42727 36000

With the Green Port and Port competitiveness indicator weights results these

ports got the final evaluation value

47

Table426 Final evaluation value on main ports Green Port measures and

competitiveness

Rotterdam

Port

Singapore

Port

LALB

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

Yocohama

Port

394 345 330 330 319 318 317

43 Results Analysis

From the results table we can obtain the many results as following

① The main Green Port measures which are more important to improve port

competitiveness are Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system the indicator weights are 01702 01506 and

01371 among the 11 indicators

② In the Green Port construction Cost on amount of CO2 emission and CO2

emissions reduction policies are the restrictions indicators but the weight

of two indicators are not big 00319 and 00196 So effect on Green Port

construction to port competitiveness does have the weaken capacity but

not clearly strengthen more clearly Thus Green Port construction really

could improve the port competitiveness

48

③ In the case study traditional ports Rotterdam and Singapore Port give us

better examples on Green Port construction especially Rotterdam Port

④ Hongkong Busan and Yocohama Port all got a lower evaluation value

But in detail Hongkong and Yocohama Port got a lower on the port

facilities and rates and charges Busan Port got a higher on the port

facilities and rates and charges but a lower on the inland connection and

social circumstance

⑤ Shanghai Port doesnrsquot have Particular strength factors but the

comprehensive strength is not bad the same as LALB Port

49

Chapter 5 Conclusion

In this thesis the effects of Green Port construction for improving the port

competitiveness have been studied Under the definition of Green Port the

characteristics of Green Port and its effects has been shown by analysing the AHP

method which based on the questionary survey for Green Port specialists and port

officers

Follow the results of analysis on Green Port competitiveness AHP model

Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green ship certification system is

better for Green Port Construction welcome for shipping companies and citizens

who live around the port And in the analysis of Port competitiveness factors port

rates and charges always affects port competitiveness a lot As a trend inland

connection factor abstracts more attention of shipping companies

50

On the trend of port department each port should take a activity to adjust

strategy for improving its competitiveness Such as in the main ports evaluation

Busan port get a high value on port rates and charges and port facilities but as a

lower value on inland connection factor the final value is not as well as we look

forward In the evaluation of Singapore Port through it gets a lower value on rates

and charges higher value on inland connection and social circumstance causes the

final value are better So the Green Port Construction may be a trend in port

department

In the results of this thesis Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system are better solutions for Green Port Construction And

especially it can be verified that the port rates and charges always affects port

competitiveness Futhermore the investment for Green Port construction and its

effects have to be verified in the future

51

References

1 Hoyle B S and Smith J 1992 Transport and Development In Modern

transport geography edited by B S Hoyle R D Knowles (London Belhaven

Press)pp11-31

2 Beresford A K C De Souza A J R G and Pettit S J 2005 Stategic

development of liner shipping companies and terminal operators Ocean yearbook

19(Chicago 1L The University of Chicago Press) pp 732-750

3 Heaver T D 2002 Supply chain and logistics management implications for

liner shipping In The handbook of maritime economics and business edited by C

Grammenos (LondonLLP) pp 375-396

4 Park T E (2011) A Study on selection criteria of Green Port and evaluation of

major Korean port A masters thesis of graduate school of Incheon university

52

5 JeongBH (2009)Green port management policy directions in the green

growth era- The case of Gwangyang port in Republic of Korea Journal of Korea

Port Economic Association Vol25(3) p361-384

6 Lee J S Han N H(2009) A study on Green Port Revitalization According to

Air Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

7 Lee Y K Nan J W(2010)Green Logistics Policy Analysis and Implications

of Japan

8 Lee B S (2010)Tendency and Countermeasures on Green Logistics in Port

Logistics Company A masters thesis of graduate school of Korean Maritime

university

9 Lee J S (2009) A Study on Green Port Revitalization According to Air

Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

10 Zhang F Y Li Z Lu X J Yao X L(2008)Competitiveness of Inland

Ports Based on F-AHP

11 Port of Long Beach (2009) Green Port Policy wwwpolbcom

12 The port of Los Angeles wwwportoflosangelesorg

34

According to the Port the Green Flag program reduced air pollution by 600tons in

2007 and is expected to do better in 2008

All of Green ship certification system incentives on the new cleaning

technology and Green Flag are incentives provided for users of port and aimed at

reduce port rates and charges So the 3 measures belong to affect port rates and

charges

Eco-friendly transport means conversion Eco-friendly means of transport are

much accounted of green port for example railway discharge less GHG emission

than truck barge with a clean engine among the river and inshore canal

Joint distribution joint distribution is a collaborative system which port

provides among many logistics companies It can make the cargo handling speed

rapidly and reduce cargo storage time for CO2 emission reducing such as

refrigerated container In an addition it also makes the logistics companies

transport more efficient

Cost on amount of CO2 emission differenced from other port the cost on

amount of CO2 is included in the port cost The cost aims to reduce the CO2

emission directly

CO2 emission reduction policies compared with other traditional port Green

Port gives more cost discount and incentives but in an addition there are many

policies on CO2 emission restriction Such as aging trucks restrictions in inland

transport department ship entry speed reduced and fuel changed in the ship

35

department and so on Whether these restriction policies constrain port

development or not and the degree of these policies constrain port development

will be explain by the AHP results

Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors some ports in the

western countries are opened as a travel place for visitors so as to change the

polluted impress and raise the position in our heart

Cost on amount of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction policies and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors can affect the social

circumstance factor Whether these measures can or not improve the social

circumstance and port competitiveness we have to see the next calculation and

results

36

Chapter 4 The Green Port Competitiveness

Analysis

41 The Green Port Competitiveness Model by AHP

The AHP is one multi-criteria decision making method which has been

extensively applied to a variety of decision-making situations The multi-criteria

techniques are considered to be a promising framework for evaluation of

decision-making factors since they have the potential to take into account

conflicting multidimensional incommensurable and uncertain effects of

decisions explicitly

In order to apply the AHP method a hierarchical decision schema was

constructed by decomposing the decision problem into its decision elements

37

After that the importance or preferences of the decision elements are examined in

a pair-wise comparison to the elements in the hierarchy The parameters are

estimated using pair-wise comparisons between the importance of the attribute or

decision element in the function using data made by each responder Making

comparisons is a question of which of the two attributes is more import as well as

how much more important

Follow these theories the Green Port Competitiveness Model choose factors as

follow in port competitiveness factors part there are port facilities port rates and

charges inland connection social circumstance in Green Port construction part

there are e-RTGC AMP AGV green ship certification system green flag

incentives on the new cleaning technology eco-friendly transport means

conversion joint distribution CO2 emission reduction policies cost on amount of

CO2 emission beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

38

Figure 41 Green Port Competitiveness AHP model

Follow the Green Port Competitiveness AHP as shown we set a questionnaire

survey to many experts scholars working in logistics system area And we got 15

ones and 14 ones results are believable and integrated

42 Green Port Competitiveness Analysis

39

The key to construction of the factors which affects the port competitiveness

is to determine the conceptual model The selection of the factors directly affects

the evaluation of the result In order to ensure the accuracy objectivity and

practicality of evaluation results the following basic principles must be followed

when selecting factors systematic principles the principle of universal

comparability practical principle and goal-oriented principle In view of the

foregoing the competitiveness which affected by Green Port construction model

is made The analysis follows established principles of port competitiveness

evaluation taking into account the characteristics and functions of the port as well

as port facilities port services port rates and charges ship entrance inland

connection social circumstances and so on

(1) Port facilities

e-RTGC U11 AMP U12 AGV U13

(2) Port rates and charges

Green ship certification system U21 Incentives on the new clean

technology U22 Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

(3) Inland connection

Eco-friendly means of transport U31 Joint distribution U32

(4) Social circumstances

40

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41 CO2 emission reduction policies

U42 Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors U43

Table 421 Details of Level I and Level II values

Level I

indicators Symbol Level II indicators Symbol

Port facilities A1

e-RTGC U11

AMP U12

AGV U13

Port rates and

charges A2

Green ship certification system U21

Incentives on the new clean technology U22

Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

Inland

connection A3

Eco-friendly means of transport U31

Joint distribution U32

Social

circumstances A4

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41

CO2 emissions reduction policies U42

Beautiful environment construction in inner

harbors U43

41

I Determination of level I indicator weights

As the ports competitiveness evaluation indicators at this level are complex

and the elements are not easily quantified AHP is adopted to determine the

indicator weights with the basic steps as follows

(1) Establish a comparative judgment matrix The comparative judgment

matrix is obtained through comparing contributed proportion of multiple

indicators to the overall target by the judgment scale wherein the fuzzy

judgment number introduced is 1 3 5 7 and 9 and the reciprocal of

such number indicates the important degree of one element relatively to

another The results are shown in next table

Table 422 Comparison matrix of level I indicators

A1 A2 A3 A4

A1 1 15 13 3

A2 5 1 3 7

A3 3 13 1 5

A4 13 17 15 1

(2) Calculate the characteristic vector of the comparative judgment matrix

which refers to the weighted vector of the indicator The writer adopts

42

the geometric method to calculate the characteristic vector The

calculated result is as follows

ω=(012 0560 026 006)T λmax=418 It can be obtained from the table

RI=09 Wherein ω is the characteristic vector corresponding to the

maximum characteristic value λmax of the comparative judgment matrix

namely the weighted vector of the indicator RI is the average

consistency indicator as shown in following table

Table423 Average random consistency indicator RI

Matrix Order

RI

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

0 0 058 09 112 124 132 141

Matrix Order

RI

9 10 11 12 13 14 15

145 149 152 154 156 158 159

(3) Conduct consistency check on the comparative judgment matrix Adopt

the random consistency proportion CR to judge the consistency of the

comparative judgment matrix According to CI= (λmax -n)(n-1) and

CR=CIRI it can be obtained through calculation CR=007lt01 Thus

this comparative judgment matrix has a satisfactory consistency and the

indicator weight coefficient calculated through this matrix is acceptable

43

II Determination of level II indicator weights

The data at this level are the details of level Ⅰ indicator The judgment

matrix obtained through comparing multiple sub-indicators under Level Ⅰ

indicators is adopted to determine the weights of sub-indicators under each

indicator one by one The specific steps are as follows

(1) The experts score the weights within the given range To determine the

weights of several small indicators under the same big indicator it is

supposed that the score of small indicator ｋ under the indicator j made

by the expert i is Xijk wherein i=12n n is the total number of

experts ј=12m m is the total number of LevelⅡ indicator к

=12Oj Oj is the number of small indicators under the big indicator ј

іјк IJK LRC l I j k

(2) The credit rating of the expert і is l l =1 2 3 l =1 indicates this expert

is quite familiar with the evaluated contents l =2 indicator this expert is

44

with the evaluated contents l =3 indicates this expert is not quite familiar

with the evaluated contents yi1 is the=08 yi2 =05 and yi3=1

(3) The comprehensive evaluation score of small indicator l under the

indicator j is as follows

(4) The formula for normalization processing of indicator weights is as

follows and the absolute weight of the indicator set is marked as

q=(q1q2q11)

(5) Because of the same justification and principle we donrsquot give the detail

about the calculation The same with the level Ⅰ calculation we

manipulation data one by one and get 14 results And obtain the average

45

results by weighted average method The results detail as Table for the

final weights of Level-Ⅱ evaluation indicators

Above the calculation process and method are just one of data from the

questionable surveys In this study the final results are got from the

weighted average by the results of each questionable survey

The final results are shown as Table424

Table424 Indicator weights table of indicator system

Level I

indicators Weight LevelⅡ indicators

Relative

weight

Absolute

weight

Importance

percentage

Port Facilities

A1 02735

e-RTGC U11 05506 01506 1506

AMP U12 01648 00451 451

AGV U13 02826 00773 773

Port Rates and

Charges A2

02902

Green ship certification s

ystem U21 04724 01371 1371

Incentives on the new

clean technology U22 02871 00833 833

Green Flag (speed

reduction incentive)U23 02405 00698 698

Inland

connection A3

02865

Eco-friendly means of

transport U31 05942 01702 1702

Joint distribution U32 04058 01163 1163

Social

environmentA4 00863

Cost on amount of CO2

emission U41 03698 00319 319

CO2 emissions reduction

policies U42 02273 00196 196

Beautiful environment

construction in inner

harbors U43

04029 00348 348

46

III Case study

In the questionable survey we also got the mark of Green Port measures

evaluation value of many main ports such as Singapore Port Shanghai Port

Hongkong Port Busan Port LALB Port Rotterdam Port and Yocohama Port

The highest mark is 5 and lowest one is 1

Table425 Evaluation value of many main ports

Singapore

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

LALB

Port

Rotterdam

Port

Yocohama

Port

Port facilities 38000 36000 34000 38182 38000 42000 32000

Port rates and

charges 32000 36000 31000 35455 32000 39000 33000

Inland

connection 39000 34545 35000 29091 35000 45000 36000

Social

circumstance 42000 32727 41000 32000 38000 42727 36000

With the Green Port and Port competitiveness indicator weights results these

ports got the final evaluation value

47

Table426 Final evaluation value on main ports Green Port measures and

competitiveness

Rotterdam

Port

Singapore

Port

LALB

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

Yocohama

Port

394 345 330 330 319 318 317

43 Results Analysis

From the results table we can obtain the many results as following

① The main Green Port measures which are more important to improve port

competitiveness are Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system the indicator weights are 01702 01506 and

01371 among the 11 indicators

② In the Green Port construction Cost on amount of CO2 emission and CO2

emissions reduction policies are the restrictions indicators but the weight

of two indicators are not big 00319 and 00196 So effect on Green Port

construction to port competitiveness does have the weaken capacity but

not clearly strengthen more clearly Thus Green Port construction really

could improve the port competitiveness

48

③ In the case study traditional ports Rotterdam and Singapore Port give us

better examples on Green Port construction especially Rotterdam Port

④ Hongkong Busan and Yocohama Port all got a lower evaluation value

But in detail Hongkong and Yocohama Port got a lower on the port

facilities and rates and charges Busan Port got a higher on the port

facilities and rates and charges but a lower on the inland connection and

social circumstance

⑤ Shanghai Port doesnrsquot have Particular strength factors but the

comprehensive strength is not bad the same as LALB Port

49

Chapter 5 Conclusion

In this thesis the effects of Green Port construction for improving the port

competitiveness have been studied Under the definition of Green Port the

characteristics of Green Port and its effects has been shown by analysing the AHP

method which based on the questionary survey for Green Port specialists and port

officers

Follow the results of analysis on Green Port competitiveness AHP model

Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green ship certification system is

better for Green Port Construction welcome for shipping companies and citizens

who live around the port And in the analysis of Port competitiveness factors port

rates and charges always affects port competitiveness a lot As a trend inland

connection factor abstracts more attention of shipping companies

50

On the trend of port department each port should take a activity to adjust

strategy for improving its competitiveness Such as in the main ports evaluation

Busan port get a high value on port rates and charges and port facilities but as a

lower value on inland connection factor the final value is not as well as we look

forward In the evaluation of Singapore Port through it gets a lower value on rates

and charges higher value on inland connection and social circumstance causes the

final value are better So the Green Port Construction may be a trend in port

department

In the results of this thesis Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system are better solutions for Green Port Construction And

especially it can be verified that the port rates and charges always affects port

competitiveness Futhermore the investment for Green Port construction and its

effects have to be verified in the future

51

References

1 Hoyle B S and Smith J 1992 Transport and Development In Modern

transport geography edited by B S Hoyle R D Knowles (London Belhaven

Press)pp11-31

2 Beresford A K C De Souza A J R G and Pettit S J 2005 Stategic

development of liner shipping companies and terminal operators Ocean yearbook

19(Chicago 1L The University of Chicago Press) pp 732-750

3 Heaver T D 2002 Supply chain and logistics management implications for

liner shipping In The handbook of maritime economics and business edited by C

Grammenos (LondonLLP) pp 375-396

4 Park T E (2011) A Study on selection criteria of Green Port and evaluation of

major Korean port A masters thesis of graduate school of Incheon university

52

5 JeongBH (2009)Green port management policy directions in the green

growth era- The case of Gwangyang port in Republic of Korea Journal of Korea

Port Economic Association Vol25(3) p361-384

6 Lee J S Han N H(2009) A study on Green Port Revitalization According to

Air Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

7 Lee Y K Nan J W(2010)Green Logistics Policy Analysis and Implications

of Japan

8 Lee B S (2010)Tendency and Countermeasures on Green Logistics in Port

Logistics Company A masters thesis of graduate school of Korean Maritime

university

9 Lee J S (2009) A Study on Green Port Revitalization According to Air

Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

10 Zhang F Y Li Z Lu X J Yao X L(2008)Competitiveness of Inland

Ports Based on F-AHP

11 Port of Long Beach (2009) Green Port Policy wwwpolbcom

12 The port of Los Angeles wwwportoflosangelesorg

35

department and so on Whether these restriction policies constrain port

development or not and the degree of these policies constrain port development

will be explain by the AHP results

Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors some ports in the

western countries are opened as a travel place for visitors so as to change the

polluted impress and raise the position in our heart

Cost on amount of CO2 emission CO2 emission reduction policies and

beautiful environment construction in inner harbors can affect the social

circumstance factor Whether these measures can or not improve the social

circumstance and port competitiveness we have to see the next calculation and

results

36

Chapter 4 The Green Port Competitiveness

Analysis

41 The Green Port Competitiveness Model by AHP

The AHP is one multi-criteria decision making method which has been

extensively applied to a variety of decision-making situations The multi-criteria

techniques are considered to be a promising framework for evaluation of

decision-making factors since they have the potential to take into account

conflicting multidimensional incommensurable and uncertain effects of

decisions explicitly

In order to apply the AHP method a hierarchical decision schema was

constructed by decomposing the decision problem into its decision elements

37

After that the importance or preferences of the decision elements are examined in

a pair-wise comparison to the elements in the hierarchy The parameters are

estimated using pair-wise comparisons between the importance of the attribute or

decision element in the function using data made by each responder Making

comparisons is a question of which of the two attributes is more import as well as

how much more important

Follow these theories the Green Port Competitiveness Model choose factors as

follow in port competitiveness factors part there are port facilities port rates and

charges inland connection social circumstance in Green Port construction part

there are e-RTGC AMP AGV green ship certification system green flag

incentives on the new cleaning technology eco-friendly transport means

conversion joint distribution CO2 emission reduction policies cost on amount of

CO2 emission beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

38

Figure 41 Green Port Competitiveness AHP model

Follow the Green Port Competitiveness AHP as shown we set a questionnaire

survey to many experts scholars working in logistics system area And we got 15

ones and 14 ones results are believable and integrated

42 Green Port Competitiveness Analysis

39

The key to construction of the factors which affects the port competitiveness

is to determine the conceptual model The selection of the factors directly affects

the evaluation of the result In order to ensure the accuracy objectivity and

practicality of evaluation results the following basic principles must be followed

when selecting factors systematic principles the principle of universal

comparability practical principle and goal-oriented principle In view of the

foregoing the competitiveness which affected by Green Port construction model

is made The analysis follows established principles of port competitiveness

evaluation taking into account the characteristics and functions of the port as well

as port facilities port services port rates and charges ship entrance inland

connection social circumstances and so on

(1) Port facilities

e-RTGC U11 AMP U12 AGV U13

(2) Port rates and charges

Green ship certification system U21 Incentives on the new clean

technology U22 Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

(3) Inland connection

Eco-friendly means of transport U31 Joint distribution U32

(4) Social circumstances

40

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41 CO2 emission reduction policies

U42 Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors U43

Table 421 Details of Level I and Level II values

Level I

indicators Symbol Level II indicators Symbol

Port facilities A1

e-RTGC U11

AMP U12

AGV U13

Port rates and

charges A2

Green ship certification system U21

Incentives on the new clean technology U22

Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

Inland

connection A3

Eco-friendly means of transport U31

Joint distribution U32

Social

circumstances A4

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41

CO2 emissions reduction policies U42

Beautiful environment construction in inner

harbors U43

41

I Determination of level I indicator weights

As the ports competitiveness evaluation indicators at this level are complex

and the elements are not easily quantified AHP is adopted to determine the

indicator weights with the basic steps as follows

(1) Establish a comparative judgment matrix The comparative judgment

matrix is obtained through comparing contributed proportion of multiple

indicators to the overall target by the judgment scale wherein the fuzzy

judgment number introduced is 1 3 5 7 and 9 and the reciprocal of

such number indicates the important degree of one element relatively to

another The results are shown in next table

Table 422 Comparison matrix of level I indicators

A1 A2 A3 A4

A1 1 15 13 3

A2 5 1 3 7

A3 3 13 1 5

A4 13 17 15 1

(2) Calculate the characteristic vector of the comparative judgment matrix

which refers to the weighted vector of the indicator The writer adopts

42

the geometric method to calculate the characteristic vector The

calculated result is as follows

ω=(012 0560 026 006)T λmax=418 It can be obtained from the table

RI=09 Wherein ω is the characteristic vector corresponding to the

maximum characteristic value λmax of the comparative judgment matrix

namely the weighted vector of the indicator RI is the average

consistency indicator as shown in following table

Table423 Average random consistency indicator RI

Matrix Order

RI

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

0 0 058 09 112 124 132 141

Matrix Order

RI

9 10 11 12 13 14 15

145 149 152 154 156 158 159

(3) Conduct consistency check on the comparative judgment matrix Adopt

the random consistency proportion CR to judge the consistency of the

comparative judgment matrix According to CI= (λmax -n)(n-1) and

CR=CIRI it can be obtained through calculation CR=007lt01 Thus

this comparative judgment matrix has a satisfactory consistency and the

indicator weight coefficient calculated through this matrix is acceptable

43

II Determination of level II indicator weights

The data at this level are the details of level Ⅰ indicator The judgment

matrix obtained through comparing multiple sub-indicators under Level Ⅰ

indicators is adopted to determine the weights of sub-indicators under each

indicator one by one The specific steps are as follows

(1) The experts score the weights within the given range To determine the

weights of several small indicators under the same big indicator it is

supposed that the score of small indicator ｋ under the indicator j made

by the expert i is Xijk wherein i=12n n is the total number of

experts ј=12m m is the total number of LevelⅡ indicator к

=12Oj Oj is the number of small indicators under the big indicator ј

іјк IJK LRC l I j k

(2) The credit rating of the expert і is l l =1 2 3 l =1 indicates this expert

is quite familiar with the evaluated contents l =2 indicator this expert is

44

with the evaluated contents l =3 indicates this expert is not quite familiar

with the evaluated contents yi1 is the=08 yi2 =05 and yi3=1

(3) The comprehensive evaluation score of small indicator l under the

indicator j is as follows

(4) The formula for normalization processing of indicator weights is as

follows and the absolute weight of the indicator set is marked as

q=(q1q2q11)

(5) Because of the same justification and principle we donrsquot give the detail

about the calculation The same with the level Ⅰ calculation we

manipulation data one by one and get 14 results And obtain the average

45

results by weighted average method The results detail as Table for the

final weights of Level-Ⅱ evaluation indicators

Above the calculation process and method are just one of data from the

questionable surveys In this study the final results are got from the

weighted average by the results of each questionable survey

The final results are shown as Table424

Table424 Indicator weights table of indicator system

Level I

indicators Weight LevelⅡ indicators

Relative

weight

Absolute

weight

Importance

percentage

Port Facilities

A1 02735

e-RTGC U11 05506 01506 1506

AMP U12 01648 00451 451

AGV U13 02826 00773 773

Port Rates and

Charges A2

02902

Green ship certification s

ystem U21 04724 01371 1371

Incentives on the new

clean technology U22 02871 00833 833

Green Flag (speed

reduction incentive)U23 02405 00698 698

Inland

connection A3

02865

Eco-friendly means of

transport U31 05942 01702 1702

Joint distribution U32 04058 01163 1163

Social

environmentA4 00863

Cost on amount of CO2

emission U41 03698 00319 319

CO2 emissions reduction

policies U42 02273 00196 196

Beautiful environment

construction in inner

harbors U43

04029 00348 348

46

III Case study

In the questionable survey we also got the mark of Green Port measures

evaluation value of many main ports such as Singapore Port Shanghai Port

Hongkong Port Busan Port LALB Port Rotterdam Port and Yocohama Port

The highest mark is 5 and lowest one is 1

Table425 Evaluation value of many main ports

Singapore

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

LALB

Port

Rotterdam

Port

Yocohama

Port

Port facilities 38000 36000 34000 38182 38000 42000 32000

Port rates and

charges 32000 36000 31000 35455 32000 39000 33000

Inland

connection 39000 34545 35000 29091 35000 45000 36000

Social

circumstance 42000 32727 41000 32000 38000 42727 36000

With the Green Port and Port competitiveness indicator weights results these

ports got the final evaluation value

47

Table426 Final evaluation value on main ports Green Port measures and

competitiveness

Rotterdam

Port

Singapore

Port

LALB

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

Yocohama

Port

394 345 330 330 319 318 317

43 Results Analysis

From the results table we can obtain the many results as following

① The main Green Port measures which are more important to improve port

competitiveness are Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system the indicator weights are 01702 01506 and

01371 among the 11 indicators

② In the Green Port construction Cost on amount of CO2 emission and CO2

emissions reduction policies are the restrictions indicators but the weight

of two indicators are not big 00319 and 00196 So effect on Green Port

construction to port competitiveness does have the weaken capacity but

not clearly strengthen more clearly Thus Green Port construction really

could improve the port competitiveness

48

③ In the case study traditional ports Rotterdam and Singapore Port give us

better examples on Green Port construction especially Rotterdam Port

④ Hongkong Busan and Yocohama Port all got a lower evaluation value

But in detail Hongkong and Yocohama Port got a lower on the port

facilities and rates and charges Busan Port got a higher on the port

facilities and rates and charges but a lower on the inland connection and

social circumstance

⑤ Shanghai Port doesnrsquot have Particular strength factors but the

comprehensive strength is not bad the same as LALB Port

49

Chapter 5 Conclusion

In this thesis the effects of Green Port construction for improving the port

competitiveness have been studied Under the definition of Green Port the

characteristics of Green Port and its effects has been shown by analysing the AHP

method which based on the questionary survey for Green Port specialists and port

officers

Follow the results of analysis on Green Port competitiveness AHP model

Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green ship certification system is

better for Green Port Construction welcome for shipping companies and citizens

who live around the port And in the analysis of Port competitiveness factors port

rates and charges always affects port competitiveness a lot As a trend inland

connection factor abstracts more attention of shipping companies

50

On the trend of port department each port should take a activity to adjust

strategy for improving its competitiveness Such as in the main ports evaluation

Busan port get a high value on port rates and charges and port facilities but as a

lower value on inland connection factor the final value is not as well as we look

forward In the evaluation of Singapore Port through it gets a lower value on rates

and charges higher value on inland connection and social circumstance causes the

final value are better So the Green Port Construction may be a trend in port

department

In the results of this thesis Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system are better solutions for Green Port Construction And

especially it can be verified that the port rates and charges always affects port

competitiveness Futhermore the investment for Green Port construction and its

effects have to be verified in the future

51

References

1 Hoyle B S and Smith J 1992 Transport and Development In Modern

transport geography edited by B S Hoyle R D Knowles (London Belhaven

Press)pp11-31

2 Beresford A K C De Souza A J R G and Pettit S J 2005 Stategic

development of liner shipping companies and terminal operators Ocean yearbook

19(Chicago 1L The University of Chicago Press) pp 732-750

3 Heaver T D 2002 Supply chain and logistics management implications for

liner shipping In The handbook of maritime economics and business edited by C

Grammenos (LondonLLP) pp 375-396

4 Park T E (2011) A Study on selection criteria of Green Port and evaluation of

major Korean port A masters thesis of graduate school of Incheon university

52

5 JeongBH (2009)Green port management policy directions in the green

growth era- The case of Gwangyang port in Republic of Korea Journal of Korea

Port Economic Association Vol25(3) p361-384

6 Lee J S Han N H(2009) A study on Green Port Revitalization According to

Air Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

7 Lee Y K Nan J W(2010)Green Logistics Policy Analysis and Implications

of Japan

8 Lee B S (2010)Tendency and Countermeasures on Green Logistics in Port

Logistics Company A masters thesis of graduate school of Korean Maritime

university

9 Lee J S (2009) A Study on Green Port Revitalization According to Air

Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

10 Zhang F Y Li Z Lu X J Yao X L(2008)Competitiveness of Inland

Ports Based on F-AHP

11 Port of Long Beach (2009) Green Port Policy wwwpolbcom

12 The port of Los Angeles wwwportoflosangelesorg

36

Chapter 4 The Green Port Competitiveness

Analysis

41 The Green Port Competitiveness Model by AHP

The AHP is one multi-criteria decision making method which has been

extensively applied to a variety of decision-making situations The multi-criteria

techniques are considered to be a promising framework for evaluation of

decision-making factors since they have the potential to take into account

conflicting multidimensional incommensurable and uncertain effects of

decisions explicitly

In order to apply the AHP method a hierarchical decision schema was

constructed by decomposing the decision problem into its decision elements

37

After that the importance or preferences of the decision elements are examined in

a pair-wise comparison to the elements in the hierarchy The parameters are

estimated using pair-wise comparisons between the importance of the attribute or

decision element in the function using data made by each responder Making

comparisons is a question of which of the two attributes is more import as well as

how much more important

Follow these theories the Green Port Competitiveness Model choose factors as

follow in port competitiveness factors part there are port facilities port rates and

charges inland connection social circumstance in Green Port construction part

there are e-RTGC AMP AGV green ship certification system green flag

incentives on the new cleaning technology eco-friendly transport means

conversion joint distribution CO2 emission reduction policies cost on amount of

CO2 emission beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

38

Figure 41 Green Port Competitiveness AHP model

Follow the Green Port Competitiveness AHP as shown we set a questionnaire

survey to many experts scholars working in logistics system area And we got 15

ones and 14 ones results are believable and integrated

42 Green Port Competitiveness Analysis

39

The key to construction of the factors which affects the port competitiveness

is to determine the conceptual model The selection of the factors directly affects

the evaluation of the result In order to ensure the accuracy objectivity and

practicality of evaluation results the following basic principles must be followed

when selecting factors systematic principles the principle of universal

comparability practical principle and goal-oriented principle In view of the

foregoing the competitiveness which affected by Green Port construction model

is made The analysis follows established principles of port competitiveness

evaluation taking into account the characteristics and functions of the port as well

as port facilities port services port rates and charges ship entrance inland

connection social circumstances and so on

(1) Port facilities

e-RTGC U11 AMP U12 AGV U13

(2) Port rates and charges

Green ship certification system U21 Incentives on the new clean

technology U22 Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

(3) Inland connection

Eco-friendly means of transport U31 Joint distribution U32

(4) Social circumstances

40

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41 CO2 emission reduction policies

U42 Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors U43

Table 421 Details of Level I and Level II values

Level I

indicators Symbol Level II indicators Symbol

Port facilities A1

e-RTGC U11

AMP U12

AGV U13

Port rates and

charges A2

Green ship certification system U21

Incentives on the new clean technology U22

Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

Inland

connection A3

Eco-friendly means of transport U31

Joint distribution U32

Social

circumstances A4

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41

CO2 emissions reduction policies U42

Beautiful environment construction in inner

harbors U43

41

I Determination of level I indicator weights

As the ports competitiveness evaluation indicators at this level are complex

and the elements are not easily quantified AHP is adopted to determine the

indicator weights with the basic steps as follows

(1) Establish a comparative judgment matrix The comparative judgment

matrix is obtained through comparing contributed proportion of multiple

indicators to the overall target by the judgment scale wherein the fuzzy

judgment number introduced is 1 3 5 7 and 9 and the reciprocal of

such number indicates the important degree of one element relatively to

another The results are shown in next table

Table 422 Comparison matrix of level I indicators

A1 A2 A3 A4

A1 1 15 13 3

A2 5 1 3 7

A3 3 13 1 5

A4 13 17 15 1

(2) Calculate the characteristic vector of the comparative judgment matrix

which refers to the weighted vector of the indicator The writer adopts

42

the geometric method to calculate the characteristic vector The

calculated result is as follows

ω=(012 0560 026 006)T λmax=418 It can be obtained from the table

RI=09 Wherein ω is the characteristic vector corresponding to the

maximum characteristic value λmax of the comparative judgment matrix

namely the weighted vector of the indicator RI is the average

consistency indicator as shown in following table

Table423 Average random consistency indicator RI

Matrix Order

RI

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

0 0 058 09 112 124 132 141

Matrix Order

RI

9 10 11 12 13 14 15

145 149 152 154 156 158 159

(3) Conduct consistency check on the comparative judgment matrix Adopt

the random consistency proportion CR to judge the consistency of the

comparative judgment matrix According to CI= (λmax -n)(n-1) and

CR=CIRI it can be obtained through calculation CR=007lt01 Thus

this comparative judgment matrix has a satisfactory consistency and the

indicator weight coefficient calculated through this matrix is acceptable

43

II Determination of level II indicator weights

The data at this level are the details of level Ⅰ indicator The judgment

matrix obtained through comparing multiple sub-indicators under Level Ⅰ

indicators is adopted to determine the weights of sub-indicators under each

indicator one by one The specific steps are as follows

(1) The experts score the weights within the given range To determine the

weights of several small indicators under the same big indicator it is

supposed that the score of small indicator ｋ under the indicator j made

by the expert i is Xijk wherein i=12n n is the total number of

experts ј=12m m is the total number of LevelⅡ indicator к

=12Oj Oj is the number of small indicators under the big indicator ј

іјк IJK LRC l I j k

(2) The credit rating of the expert і is l l =1 2 3 l =1 indicates this expert

is quite familiar with the evaluated contents l =2 indicator this expert is

44

with the evaluated contents l =3 indicates this expert is not quite familiar

with the evaluated contents yi1 is the=08 yi2 =05 and yi3=1

(3) The comprehensive evaluation score of small indicator l under the

indicator j is as follows

(4) The formula for normalization processing of indicator weights is as

follows and the absolute weight of the indicator set is marked as

q=(q1q2q11)

(5) Because of the same justification and principle we donrsquot give the detail

about the calculation The same with the level Ⅰ calculation we

manipulation data one by one and get 14 results And obtain the average

45

results by weighted average method The results detail as Table for the

final weights of Level-Ⅱ evaluation indicators

Above the calculation process and method are just one of data from the

questionable surveys In this study the final results are got from the

weighted average by the results of each questionable survey

The final results are shown as Table424

Table424 Indicator weights table of indicator system

Level I

indicators Weight LevelⅡ indicators

Relative

weight

Absolute

weight

Importance

percentage

Port Facilities

A1 02735

e-RTGC U11 05506 01506 1506

AMP U12 01648 00451 451

AGV U13 02826 00773 773

Port Rates and

Charges A2

02902

Green ship certification s

ystem U21 04724 01371 1371

Incentives on the new

clean technology U22 02871 00833 833

Green Flag (speed

reduction incentive)U23 02405 00698 698

Inland

connection A3

02865

Eco-friendly means of

transport U31 05942 01702 1702

Joint distribution U32 04058 01163 1163

Social

environmentA4 00863

Cost on amount of CO2

emission U41 03698 00319 319

CO2 emissions reduction

policies U42 02273 00196 196

Beautiful environment

construction in inner

harbors U43

04029 00348 348

46

III Case study

In the questionable survey we also got the mark of Green Port measures

evaluation value of many main ports such as Singapore Port Shanghai Port

Hongkong Port Busan Port LALB Port Rotterdam Port and Yocohama Port

The highest mark is 5 and lowest one is 1

Table425 Evaluation value of many main ports

Singapore

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

LALB

Port

Rotterdam

Port

Yocohama

Port

Port facilities 38000 36000 34000 38182 38000 42000 32000

Port rates and

charges 32000 36000 31000 35455 32000 39000 33000

Inland

connection 39000 34545 35000 29091 35000 45000 36000

Social

circumstance 42000 32727 41000 32000 38000 42727 36000

With the Green Port and Port competitiveness indicator weights results these

ports got the final evaluation value

47

Table426 Final evaluation value on main ports Green Port measures and

competitiveness

Rotterdam

Port

Singapore

Port

LALB

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

Yocohama

Port

394 345 330 330 319 318 317

43 Results Analysis

From the results table we can obtain the many results as following

① The main Green Port measures which are more important to improve port

competitiveness are Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system the indicator weights are 01702 01506 and

01371 among the 11 indicators

② In the Green Port construction Cost on amount of CO2 emission and CO2

emissions reduction policies are the restrictions indicators but the weight

of two indicators are not big 00319 and 00196 So effect on Green Port

construction to port competitiveness does have the weaken capacity but

not clearly strengthen more clearly Thus Green Port construction really

could improve the port competitiveness

48

③ In the case study traditional ports Rotterdam and Singapore Port give us

better examples on Green Port construction especially Rotterdam Port

④ Hongkong Busan and Yocohama Port all got a lower evaluation value

But in detail Hongkong and Yocohama Port got a lower on the port

facilities and rates and charges Busan Port got a higher on the port

facilities and rates and charges but a lower on the inland connection and

social circumstance

⑤ Shanghai Port doesnrsquot have Particular strength factors but the

comprehensive strength is not bad the same as LALB Port

49

Chapter 5 Conclusion

In this thesis the effects of Green Port construction for improving the port

competitiveness have been studied Under the definition of Green Port the

characteristics of Green Port and its effects has been shown by analysing the AHP

method which based on the questionary survey for Green Port specialists and port

officers

Follow the results of analysis on Green Port competitiveness AHP model

Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green ship certification system is

better for Green Port Construction welcome for shipping companies and citizens

who live around the port And in the analysis of Port competitiveness factors port

rates and charges always affects port competitiveness a lot As a trend inland

connection factor abstracts more attention of shipping companies

50

On the trend of port department each port should take a activity to adjust

strategy for improving its competitiveness Such as in the main ports evaluation

Busan port get a high value on port rates and charges and port facilities but as a

lower value on inland connection factor the final value is not as well as we look

forward In the evaluation of Singapore Port through it gets a lower value on rates

and charges higher value on inland connection and social circumstance causes the

final value are better So the Green Port Construction may be a trend in port

department

In the results of this thesis Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system are better solutions for Green Port Construction And

especially it can be verified that the port rates and charges always affects port

competitiveness Futhermore the investment for Green Port construction and its

effects have to be verified in the future

51

References

1 Hoyle B S and Smith J 1992 Transport and Development In Modern

transport geography edited by B S Hoyle R D Knowles (London Belhaven

Press)pp11-31

2 Beresford A K C De Souza A J R G and Pettit S J 2005 Stategic

development of liner shipping companies and terminal operators Ocean yearbook

19(Chicago 1L The University of Chicago Press) pp 732-750

3 Heaver T D 2002 Supply chain and logistics management implications for

liner shipping In The handbook of maritime economics and business edited by C

Grammenos (LondonLLP) pp 375-396

4 Park T E (2011) A Study on selection criteria of Green Port and evaluation of

major Korean port A masters thesis of graduate school of Incheon university

52

5 JeongBH (2009)Green port management policy directions in the green

growth era- The case of Gwangyang port in Republic of Korea Journal of Korea

Port Economic Association Vol25(3) p361-384

6 Lee J S Han N H(2009) A study on Green Port Revitalization According to

Air Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

7 Lee Y K Nan J W(2010)Green Logistics Policy Analysis and Implications

of Japan

8 Lee B S (2010)Tendency and Countermeasures on Green Logistics in Port

Logistics Company A masters thesis of graduate school of Korean Maritime

university

9 Lee J S (2009) A Study on Green Port Revitalization According to Air

Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

10 Zhang F Y Li Z Lu X J Yao X L(2008)Competitiveness of Inland

Ports Based on F-AHP

11 Port of Long Beach (2009) Green Port Policy wwwpolbcom

12 The port of Los Angeles wwwportoflosangelesorg

37

After that the importance or preferences of the decision elements are examined in

a pair-wise comparison to the elements in the hierarchy The parameters are

estimated using pair-wise comparisons between the importance of the attribute or

decision element in the function using data made by each responder Making

comparisons is a question of which of the two attributes is more import as well as

how much more important

Follow these theories the Green Port Competitiveness Model choose factors as

follow in port competitiveness factors part there are port facilities port rates and

charges inland connection social circumstance in Green Port construction part

there are e-RTGC AMP AGV green ship certification system green flag

incentives on the new cleaning technology eco-friendly transport means

conversion joint distribution CO2 emission reduction policies cost on amount of

CO2 emission beautiful environment construction in inner harbors

38

Figure 41 Green Port Competitiveness AHP model

Follow the Green Port Competitiveness AHP as shown we set a questionnaire

survey to many experts scholars working in logistics system area And we got 15

ones and 14 ones results are believable and integrated

42 Green Port Competitiveness Analysis

39

The key to construction of the factors which affects the port competitiveness

is to determine the conceptual model The selection of the factors directly affects

the evaluation of the result In order to ensure the accuracy objectivity and

practicality of evaluation results the following basic principles must be followed

when selecting factors systematic principles the principle of universal

comparability practical principle and goal-oriented principle In view of the

foregoing the competitiveness which affected by Green Port construction model

is made The analysis follows established principles of port competitiveness

evaluation taking into account the characteristics and functions of the port as well

as port facilities port services port rates and charges ship entrance inland

connection social circumstances and so on

(1) Port facilities

e-RTGC U11 AMP U12 AGV U13

(2) Port rates and charges

Green ship certification system U21 Incentives on the new clean

technology U22 Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

(3) Inland connection

Eco-friendly means of transport U31 Joint distribution U32

(4) Social circumstances

40

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41 CO2 emission reduction policies

U42 Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors U43

Table 421 Details of Level I and Level II values

Level I

indicators Symbol Level II indicators Symbol

Port facilities A1

e-RTGC U11

AMP U12

AGV U13

Port rates and

charges A2

Green ship certification system U21

Incentives on the new clean technology U22

Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

Inland

connection A3

Eco-friendly means of transport U31

Joint distribution U32

Social

circumstances A4

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41

CO2 emissions reduction policies U42

Beautiful environment construction in inner

harbors U43

41

I Determination of level I indicator weights

As the ports competitiveness evaluation indicators at this level are complex

and the elements are not easily quantified AHP is adopted to determine the

indicator weights with the basic steps as follows

(1) Establish a comparative judgment matrix The comparative judgment

matrix is obtained through comparing contributed proportion of multiple

indicators to the overall target by the judgment scale wherein the fuzzy

judgment number introduced is 1 3 5 7 and 9 and the reciprocal of

such number indicates the important degree of one element relatively to

another The results are shown in next table

Table 422 Comparison matrix of level I indicators

A1 A2 A3 A4

A1 1 15 13 3

A2 5 1 3 7

A3 3 13 1 5

A4 13 17 15 1

(2) Calculate the characteristic vector of the comparative judgment matrix

which refers to the weighted vector of the indicator The writer adopts

42

the geometric method to calculate the characteristic vector The

calculated result is as follows

ω=(012 0560 026 006)T λmax=418 It can be obtained from the table

RI=09 Wherein ω is the characteristic vector corresponding to the

maximum characteristic value λmax of the comparative judgment matrix

namely the weighted vector of the indicator RI is the average

consistency indicator as shown in following table

Table423 Average random consistency indicator RI

Matrix Order

RI

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

0 0 058 09 112 124 132 141

Matrix Order

RI

9 10 11 12 13 14 15

145 149 152 154 156 158 159

(3) Conduct consistency check on the comparative judgment matrix Adopt

the random consistency proportion CR to judge the consistency of the

comparative judgment matrix According to CI= (λmax -n)(n-1) and

CR=CIRI it can be obtained through calculation CR=007lt01 Thus

this comparative judgment matrix has a satisfactory consistency and the

indicator weight coefficient calculated through this matrix is acceptable

43

II Determination of level II indicator weights

The data at this level are the details of level Ⅰ indicator The judgment

matrix obtained through comparing multiple sub-indicators under Level Ⅰ

indicators is adopted to determine the weights of sub-indicators under each

indicator one by one The specific steps are as follows

(1) The experts score the weights within the given range To determine the

weights of several small indicators under the same big indicator it is

supposed that the score of small indicator ｋ under the indicator j made

by the expert i is Xijk wherein i=12n n is the total number of

experts ј=12m m is the total number of LevelⅡ indicator к

=12Oj Oj is the number of small indicators under the big indicator ј

іјк IJK LRC l I j k

(2) The credit rating of the expert і is l l =1 2 3 l =1 indicates this expert

is quite familiar with the evaluated contents l =2 indicator this expert is

44

with the evaluated contents l =3 indicates this expert is not quite familiar

with the evaluated contents yi1 is the=08 yi2 =05 and yi3=1

(3) The comprehensive evaluation score of small indicator l under the

indicator j is as follows

(4) The formula for normalization processing of indicator weights is as

follows and the absolute weight of the indicator set is marked as

q=(q1q2q11)

(5) Because of the same justification and principle we donrsquot give the detail

about the calculation The same with the level Ⅰ calculation we

manipulation data one by one and get 14 results And obtain the average

45

results by weighted average method The results detail as Table for the

final weights of Level-Ⅱ evaluation indicators

Above the calculation process and method are just one of data from the

questionable surveys In this study the final results are got from the

weighted average by the results of each questionable survey

The final results are shown as Table424

Table424 Indicator weights table of indicator system

Level I

indicators Weight LevelⅡ indicators

Relative

weight

Absolute

weight

Importance

percentage

Port Facilities

A1 02735

e-RTGC U11 05506 01506 1506

AMP U12 01648 00451 451

AGV U13 02826 00773 773

Port Rates and

Charges A2

02902

Green ship certification s

ystem U21 04724 01371 1371

Incentives on the new

clean technology U22 02871 00833 833

Green Flag (speed

reduction incentive)U23 02405 00698 698

Inland

connection A3

02865

Eco-friendly means of

transport U31 05942 01702 1702

Joint distribution U32 04058 01163 1163

Social

environmentA4 00863

Cost on amount of CO2

emission U41 03698 00319 319

CO2 emissions reduction

policies U42 02273 00196 196

Beautiful environment

construction in inner

harbors U43

04029 00348 348

46

III Case study

In the questionable survey we also got the mark of Green Port measures

evaluation value of many main ports such as Singapore Port Shanghai Port

Hongkong Port Busan Port LALB Port Rotterdam Port and Yocohama Port

The highest mark is 5 and lowest one is 1

Table425 Evaluation value of many main ports

Singapore

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

LALB

Port

Rotterdam

Port

Yocohama

Port

Port facilities 38000 36000 34000 38182 38000 42000 32000

Port rates and

charges 32000 36000 31000 35455 32000 39000 33000

Inland

connection 39000 34545 35000 29091 35000 45000 36000

Social

circumstance 42000 32727 41000 32000 38000 42727 36000

With the Green Port and Port competitiveness indicator weights results these

ports got the final evaluation value

47

Table426 Final evaluation value on main ports Green Port measures and

competitiveness

Rotterdam

Port

Singapore

Port

LALB

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

Yocohama

Port

394 345 330 330 319 318 317

43 Results Analysis

From the results table we can obtain the many results as following

① The main Green Port measures which are more important to improve port

competitiveness are Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system the indicator weights are 01702 01506 and

01371 among the 11 indicators

② In the Green Port construction Cost on amount of CO2 emission and CO2

emissions reduction policies are the restrictions indicators but the weight

of two indicators are not big 00319 and 00196 So effect on Green Port

construction to port competitiveness does have the weaken capacity but

not clearly strengthen more clearly Thus Green Port construction really

could improve the port competitiveness

48

③ In the case study traditional ports Rotterdam and Singapore Port give us

better examples on Green Port construction especially Rotterdam Port

④ Hongkong Busan and Yocohama Port all got a lower evaluation value

But in detail Hongkong and Yocohama Port got a lower on the port

facilities and rates and charges Busan Port got a higher on the port

facilities and rates and charges but a lower on the inland connection and

social circumstance

⑤ Shanghai Port doesnrsquot have Particular strength factors but the

comprehensive strength is not bad the same as LALB Port

49

Chapter 5 Conclusion

In this thesis the effects of Green Port construction for improving the port

competitiveness have been studied Under the definition of Green Port the

characteristics of Green Port and its effects has been shown by analysing the AHP

method which based on the questionary survey for Green Port specialists and port

officers

Follow the results of analysis on Green Port competitiveness AHP model

Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green ship certification system is

better for Green Port Construction welcome for shipping companies and citizens

who live around the port And in the analysis of Port competitiveness factors port

rates and charges always affects port competitiveness a lot As a trend inland

connection factor abstracts more attention of shipping companies

50

On the trend of port department each port should take a activity to adjust

strategy for improving its competitiveness Such as in the main ports evaluation

Busan port get a high value on port rates and charges and port facilities but as a

lower value on inland connection factor the final value is not as well as we look

forward In the evaluation of Singapore Port through it gets a lower value on rates

and charges higher value on inland connection and social circumstance causes the

final value are better So the Green Port Construction may be a trend in port

department

In the results of this thesis Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system are better solutions for Green Port Construction And

especially it can be verified that the port rates and charges always affects port

competitiveness Futhermore the investment for Green Port construction and its

effects have to be verified in the future

51

References

1 Hoyle B S and Smith J 1992 Transport and Development In Modern

transport geography edited by B S Hoyle R D Knowles (London Belhaven

Press)pp11-31

2 Beresford A K C De Souza A J R G and Pettit S J 2005 Stategic

development of liner shipping companies and terminal operators Ocean yearbook

19(Chicago 1L The University of Chicago Press) pp 732-750

3 Heaver T D 2002 Supply chain and logistics management implications for

liner shipping In The handbook of maritime economics and business edited by C

Grammenos (LondonLLP) pp 375-396

4 Park T E (2011) A Study on selection criteria of Green Port and evaluation of

major Korean port A masters thesis of graduate school of Incheon university

52

5 JeongBH (2009)Green port management policy directions in the green

growth era- The case of Gwangyang port in Republic of Korea Journal of Korea

Port Economic Association Vol25(3) p361-384

6 Lee J S Han N H(2009) A study on Green Port Revitalization According to

Air Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

7 Lee Y K Nan J W(2010)Green Logistics Policy Analysis and Implications

of Japan

8 Lee B S (2010)Tendency and Countermeasures on Green Logistics in Port

Logistics Company A masters thesis of graduate school of Korean Maritime

university

9 Lee J S (2009) A Study on Green Port Revitalization According to Air

Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

10 Zhang F Y Li Z Lu X J Yao X L(2008)Competitiveness of Inland

Ports Based on F-AHP

11 Port of Long Beach (2009) Green Port Policy wwwpolbcom

12 The port of Los Angeles wwwportoflosangelesorg

38

Figure 41 Green Port Competitiveness AHP model

Follow the Green Port Competitiveness AHP as shown we set a questionnaire

survey to many experts scholars working in logistics system area And we got 15

ones and 14 ones results are believable and integrated

42 Green Port Competitiveness Analysis

39

The key to construction of the factors which affects the port competitiveness

is to determine the conceptual model The selection of the factors directly affects

the evaluation of the result In order to ensure the accuracy objectivity and

practicality of evaluation results the following basic principles must be followed

when selecting factors systematic principles the principle of universal

comparability practical principle and goal-oriented principle In view of the

foregoing the competitiveness which affected by Green Port construction model

is made The analysis follows established principles of port competitiveness

evaluation taking into account the characteristics and functions of the port as well

as port facilities port services port rates and charges ship entrance inland

connection social circumstances and so on

(1) Port facilities

e-RTGC U11 AMP U12 AGV U13

(2) Port rates and charges

Green ship certification system U21 Incentives on the new clean

technology U22 Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

(3) Inland connection

Eco-friendly means of transport U31 Joint distribution U32

(4) Social circumstances

40

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41 CO2 emission reduction policies

U42 Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors U43

Table 421 Details of Level I and Level II values

Level I

indicators Symbol Level II indicators Symbol

Port facilities A1

e-RTGC U11

AMP U12

AGV U13

Port rates and

charges A2

Green ship certification system U21

Incentives on the new clean technology U22

Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

Inland

connection A3

Eco-friendly means of transport U31

Joint distribution U32

Social

circumstances A4

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41

CO2 emissions reduction policies U42

Beautiful environment construction in inner

harbors U43

41

I Determination of level I indicator weights

As the ports competitiveness evaluation indicators at this level are complex

and the elements are not easily quantified AHP is adopted to determine the

indicator weights with the basic steps as follows

(1) Establish a comparative judgment matrix The comparative judgment

matrix is obtained through comparing contributed proportion of multiple

indicators to the overall target by the judgment scale wherein the fuzzy

judgment number introduced is 1 3 5 7 and 9 and the reciprocal of

such number indicates the important degree of one element relatively to

another The results are shown in next table

Table 422 Comparison matrix of level I indicators

A1 A2 A3 A4

A1 1 15 13 3

A2 5 1 3 7

A3 3 13 1 5

A4 13 17 15 1

(2) Calculate the characteristic vector of the comparative judgment matrix

which refers to the weighted vector of the indicator The writer adopts

42

the geometric method to calculate the characteristic vector The

calculated result is as follows

ω=(012 0560 026 006)T λmax=418 It can be obtained from the table

RI=09 Wherein ω is the characteristic vector corresponding to the

maximum characteristic value λmax of the comparative judgment matrix

namely the weighted vector of the indicator RI is the average

consistency indicator as shown in following table

Table423 Average random consistency indicator RI

Matrix Order

RI

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

0 0 058 09 112 124 132 141

Matrix Order

RI

9 10 11 12 13 14 15

145 149 152 154 156 158 159

(3) Conduct consistency check on the comparative judgment matrix Adopt

the random consistency proportion CR to judge the consistency of the

comparative judgment matrix According to CI= (λmax -n)(n-1) and

CR=CIRI it can be obtained through calculation CR=007lt01 Thus

this comparative judgment matrix has a satisfactory consistency and the

indicator weight coefficient calculated through this matrix is acceptable

43

II Determination of level II indicator weights

The data at this level are the details of level Ⅰ indicator The judgment

matrix obtained through comparing multiple sub-indicators under Level Ⅰ

indicators is adopted to determine the weights of sub-indicators under each

indicator one by one The specific steps are as follows

(1) The experts score the weights within the given range To determine the

weights of several small indicators under the same big indicator it is

supposed that the score of small indicator ｋ under the indicator j made

by the expert i is Xijk wherein i=12n n is the total number of

experts ј=12m m is the total number of LevelⅡ indicator к

=12Oj Oj is the number of small indicators under the big indicator ј

іјк IJK LRC l I j k

(2) The credit rating of the expert і is l l =1 2 3 l =1 indicates this expert

is quite familiar with the evaluated contents l =2 indicator this expert is

44

with the evaluated contents l =3 indicates this expert is not quite familiar

with the evaluated contents yi1 is the=08 yi2 =05 and yi3=1

(3) The comprehensive evaluation score of small indicator l under the

indicator j is as follows

(4) The formula for normalization processing of indicator weights is as

follows and the absolute weight of the indicator set is marked as

q=(q1q2q11)

(5) Because of the same justification and principle we donrsquot give the detail

about the calculation The same with the level Ⅰ calculation we

manipulation data one by one and get 14 results And obtain the average

45

results by weighted average method The results detail as Table for the

final weights of Level-Ⅱ evaluation indicators

Above the calculation process and method are just one of data from the

questionable surveys In this study the final results are got from the

weighted average by the results of each questionable survey

The final results are shown as Table424

Table424 Indicator weights table of indicator system

Level I

indicators Weight LevelⅡ indicators

Relative

weight

Absolute

weight

Importance

percentage

Port Facilities

A1 02735

e-RTGC U11 05506 01506 1506

AMP U12 01648 00451 451

AGV U13 02826 00773 773

Port Rates and

Charges A2

02902

Green ship certification s

ystem U21 04724 01371 1371

Incentives on the new

clean technology U22 02871 00833 833

Green Flag (speed

reduction incentive)U23 02405 00698 698

Inland

connection A3

02865

Eco-friendly means of

transport U31 05942 01702 1702

Joint distribution U32 04058 01163 1163

Social

environmentA4 00863

Cost on amount of CO2

emission U41 03698 00319 319

CO2 emissions reduction

policies U42 02273 00196 196

Beautiful environment

construction in inner

harbors U43

04029 00348 348

46

III Case study

In the questionable survey we also got the mark of Green Port measures

evaluation value of many main ports such as Singapore Port Shanghai Port

Hongkong Port Busan Port LALB Port Rotterdam Port and Yocohama Port

The highest mark is 5 and lowest one is 1

Table425 Evaluation value of many main ports

Singapore

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

LALB

Port

Rotterdam

Port

Yocohama

Port

Port facilities 38000 36000 34000 38182 38000 42000 32000

Port rates and

charges 32000 36000 31000 35455 32000 39000 33000

Inland

connection 39000 34545 35000 29091 35000 45000 36000

Social

circumstance 42000 32727 41000 32000 38000 42727 36000

With the Green Port and Port competitiveness indicator weights results these

ports got the final evaluation value

47

Table426 Final evaluation value on main ports Green Port measures and

competitiveness

Rotterdam

Port

Singapore

Port

LALB

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

Yocohama

Port

394 345 330 330 319 318 317

43 Results Analysis

From the results table we can obtain the many results as following

① The main Green Port measures which are more important to improve port

competitiveness are Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system the indicator weights are 01702 01506 and

01371 among the 11 indicators

② In the Green Port construction Cost on amount of CO2 emission and CO2

emissions reduction policies are the restrictions indicators but the weight

of two indicators are not big 00319 and 00196 So effect on Green Port

construction to port competitiveness does have the weaken capacity but

not clearly strengthen more clearly Thus Green Port construction really

could improve the port competitiveness

48

③ In the case study traditional ports Rotterdam and Singapore Port give us

better examples on Green Port construction especially Rotterdam Port

④ Hongkong Busan and Yocohama Port all got a lower evaluation value

But in detail Hongkong and Yocohama Port got a lower on the port

facilities and rates and charges Busan Port got a higher on the port

facilities and rates and charges but a lower on the inland connection and

social circumstance

⑤ Shanghai Port doesnrsquot have Particular strength factors but the

comprehensive strength is not bad the same as LALB Port

49

Chapter 5 Conclusion

In this thesis the effects of Green Port construction for improving the port

competitiveness have been studied Under the definition of Green Port the

characteristics of Green Port and its effects has been shown by analysing the AHP

method which based on the questionary survey for Green Port specialists and port

officers

Follow the results of analysis on Green Port competitiveness AHP model

Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green ship certification system is

better for Green Port Construction welcome for shipping companies and citizens

who live around the port And in the analysis of Port competitiveness factors port

rates and charges always affects port competitiveness a lot As a trend inland

connection factor abstracts more attention of shipping companies

50

On the trend of port department each port should take a activity to adjust

strategy for improving its competitiveness Such as in the main ports evaluation

Busan port get a high value on port rates and charges and port facilities but as a

lower value on inland connection factor the final value is not as well as we look

forward In the evaluation of Singapore Port through it gets a lower value on rates

and charges higher value on inland connection and social circumstance causes the

final value are better So the Green Port Construction may be a trend in port

department

In the results of this thesis Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system are better solutions for Green Port Construction And

especially it can be verified that the port rates and charges always affects port

competitiveness Futhermore the investment for Green Port construction and its

effects have to be verified in the future

51

References

1 Hoyle B S and Smith J 1992 Transport and Development In Modern

transport geography edited by B S Hoyle R D Knowles (London Belhaven

Press)pp11-31

2 Beresford A K C De Souza A J R G and Pettit S J 2005 Stategic

development of liner shipping companies and terminal operators Ocean yearbook

19(Chicago 1L The University of Chicago Press) pp 732-750

3 Heaver T D 2002 Supply chain and logistics management implications for

liner shipping In The handbook of maritime economics and business edited by C

Grammenos (LondonLLP) pp 375-396

4 Park T E (2011) A Study on selection criteria of Green Port and evaluation of

major Korean port A masters thesis of graduate school of Incheon university

52

5 JeongBH (2009)Green port management policy directions in the green

growth era- The case of Gwangyang port in Republic of Korea Journal of Korea

Port Economic Association Vol25(3) p361-384

6 Lee J S Han N H(2009) A study on Green Port Revitalization According to

Air Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

7 Lee Y K Nan J W(2010)Green Logistics Policy Analysis and Implications

of Japan

8 Lee B S (2010)Tendency and Countermeasures on Green Logistics in Port

Logistics Company A masters thesis of graduate school of Korean Maritime

university

9 Lee J S (2009) A Study on Green Port Revitalization According to Air

Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

10 Zhang F Y Li Z Lu X J Yao X L(2008)Competitiveness of Inland

Ports Based on F-AHP

11 Port of Long Beach (2009) Green Port Policy wwwpolbcom

12 The port of Los Angeles wwwportoflosangelesorg

39

The key to construction of the factors which affects the port competitiveness

is to determine the conceptual model The selection of the factors directly affects

the evaluation of the result In order to ensure the accuracy objectivity and

practicality of evaluation results the following basic principles must be followed

when selecting factors systematic principles the principle of universal

comparability practical principle and goal-oriented principle In view of the

foregoing the competitiveness which affected by Green Port construction model

is made The analysis follows established principles of port competitiveness

evaluation taking into account the characteristics and functions of the port as well

as port facilities port services port rates and charges ship entrance inland

connection social circumstances and so on

(1) Port facilities

e-RTGC U11 AMP U12 AGV U13

(2) Port rates and charges

Green ship certification system U21 Incentives on the new clean

technology U22 Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

(3) Inland connection

Eco-friendly means of transport U31 Joint distribution U32

(4) Social circumstances

40

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41 CO2 emission reduction policies

U42 Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors U43

Table 421 Details of Level I and Level II values

Level I

indicators Symbol Level II indicators Symbol

Port facilities A1

e-RTGC U11

AMP U12

AGV U13

Port rates and

charges A2

Green ship certification system U21

Incentives on the new clean technology U22

Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

Inland

connection A3

Eco-friendly means of transport U31

Joint distribution U32

Social

circumstances A4

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41

CO2 emissions reduction policies U42

Beautiful environment construction in inner

harbors U43

41

I Determination of level I indicator weights

As the ports competitiveness evaluation indicators at this level are complex

and the elements are not easily quantified AHP is adopted to determine the

indicator weights with the basic steps as follows

(1) Establish a comparative judgment matrix The comparative judgment

matrix is obtained through comparing contributed proportion of multiple

indicators to the overall target by the judgment scale wherein the fuzzy

judgment number introduced is 1 3 5 7 and 9 and the reciprocal of

such number indicates the important degree of one element relatively to

another The results are shown in next table

Table 422 Comparison matrix of level I indicators

A1 A2 A3 A4

A1 1 15 13 3

A2 5 1 3 7

A3 3 13 1 5

A4 13 17 15 1

(2) Calculate the characteristic vector of the comparative judgment matrix

which refers to the weighted vector of the indicator The writer adopts

42

the geometric method to calculate the characteristic vector The

calculated result is as follows

ω=(012 0560 026 006)T λmax=418 It can be obtained from the table

RI=09 Wherein ω is the characteristic vector corresponding to the

maximum characteristic value λmax of the comparative judgment matrix

namely the weighted vector of the indicator RI is the average

consistency indicator as shown in following table

Table423 Average random consistency indicator RI

Matrix Order

RI

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

0 0 058 09 112 124 132 141

Matrix Order

RI

9 10 11 12 13 14 15

145 149 152 154 156 158 159

(3) Conduct consistency check on the comparative judgment matrix Adopt

the random consistency proportion CR to judge the consistency of the

comparative judgment matrix According to CI= (λmax -n)(n-1) and

CR=CIRI it can be obtained through calculation CR=007lt01 Thus

this comparative judgment matrix has a satisfactory consistency and the

indicator weight coefficient calculated through this matrix is acceptable

43

II Determination of level II indicator weights

The data at this level are the details of level Ⅰ indicator The judgment

matrix obtained through comparing multiple sub-indicators under Level Ⅰ

indicators is adopted to determine the weights of sub-indicators under each

indicator one by one The specific steps are as follows

(1) The experts score the weights within the given range To determine the

weights of several small indicators under the same big indicator it is

supposed that the score of small indicator ｋ under the indicator j made

by the expert i is Xijk wherein i=12n n is the total number of

experts ј=12m m is the total number of LevelⅡ indicator к

=12Oj Oj is the number of small indicators under the big indicator ј

іјк IJK LRC l I j k

(2) The credit rating of the expert і is l l =1 2 3 l =1 indicates this expert

is quite familiar with the evaluated contents l =2 indicator this expert is

44

with the evaluated contents l =3 indicates this expert is not quite familiar

with the evaluated contents yi1 is the=08 yi2 =05 and yi3=1

(3) The comprehensive evaluation score of small indicator l under the

indicator j is as follows

(4) The formula for normalization processing of indicator weights is as

follows and the absolute weight of the indicator set is marked as

q=(q1q2q11)

(5) Because of the same justification and principle we donrsquot give the detail

about the calculation The same with the level Ⅰ calculation we

manipulation data one by one and get 14 results And obtain the average

45

results by weighted average method The results detail as Table for the

final weights of Level-Ⅱ evaluation indicators

Above the calculation process and method are just one of data from the

questionable surveys In this study the final results are got from the

weighted average by the results of each questionable survey

The final results are shown as Table424

Table424 Indicator weights table of indicator system

Level I

indicators Weight LevelⅡ indicators

Relative

weight

Absolute

weight

Importance

percentage

Port Facilities

A1 02735

e-RTGC U11 05506 01506 1506

AMP U12 01648 00451 451

AGV U13 02826 00773 773

Port Rates and

Charges A2

02902

Green ship certification s

ystem U21 04724 01371 1371

Incentives on the new

clean technology U22 02871 00833 833

Green Flag (speed

reduction incentive)U23 02405 00698 698

Inland

connection A3

02865

Eco-friendly means of

transport U31 05942 01702 1702

Joint distribution U32 04058 01163 1163

Social

environmentA4 00863

Cost on amount of CO2

emission U41 03698 00319 319

CO2 emissions reduction

policies U42 02273 00196 196

Beautiful environment

construction in inner

harbors U43

04029 00348 348

46

III Case study

In the questionable survey we also got the mark of Green Port measures

evaluation value of many main ports such as Singapore Port Shanghai Port

Hongkong Port Busan Port LALB Port Rotterdam Port and Yocohama Port

The highest mark is 5 and lowest one is 1

Table425 Evaluation value of many main ports

Singapore

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

LALB

Port

Rotterdam

Port

Yocohama

Port

Port facilities 38000 36000 34000 38182 38000 42000 32000

Port rates and

charges 32000 36000 31000 35455 32000 39000 33000

Inland

connection 39000 34545 35000 29091 35000 45000 36000

Social

circumstance 42000 32727 41000 32000 38000 42727 36000

With the Green Port and Port competitiveness indicator weights results these

ports got the final evaluation value

47

Table426 Final evaluation value on main ports Green Port measures and

competitiveness

Rotterdam

Port

Singapore

Port

LALB

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

Yocohama

Port

394 345 330 330 319 318 317

43 Results Analysis

From the results table we can obtain the many results as following

① The main Green Port measures which are more important to improve port

competitiveness are Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system the indicator weights are 01702 01506 and

01371 among the 11 indicators

② In the Green Port construction Cost on amount of CO2 emission and CO2

emissions reduction policies are the restrictions indicators but the weight

of two indicators are not big 00319 and 00196 So effect on Green Port

construction to port competitiveness does have the weaken capacity but

not clearly strengthen more clearly Thus Green Port construction really

could improve the port competitiveness

48

③ In the case study traditional ports Rotterdam and Singapore Port give us

better examples on Green Port construction especially Rotterdam Port

④ Hongkong Busan and Yocohama Port all got a lower evaluation value

But in detail Hongkong and Yocohama Port got a lower on the port

facilities and rates and charges Busan Port got a higher on the port

facilities and rates and charges but a lower on the inland connection and

social circumstance

⑤ Shanghai Port doesnrsquot have Particular strength factors but the

comprehensive strength is not bad the same as LALB Port

49

Chapter 5 Conclusion

In this thesis the effects of Green Port construction for improving the port

competitiveness have been studied Under the definition of Green Port the

characteristics of Green Port and its effects has been shown by analysing the AHP

method which based on the questionary survey for Green Port specialists and port

officers

Follow the results of analysis on Green Port competitiveness AHP model

Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green ship certification system is

better for Green Port Construction welcome for shipping companies and citizens

who live around the port And in the analysis of Port competitiveness factors port

rates and charges always affects port competitiveness a lot As a trend inland

connection factor abstracts more attention of shipping companies

50

On the trend of port department each port should take a activity to adjust

strategy for improving its competitiveness Such as in the main ports evaluation

Busan port get a high value on port rates and charges and port facilities but as a

lower value on inland connection factor the final value is not as well as we look

forward In the evaluation of Singapore Port through it gets a lower value on rates

and charges higher value on inland connection and social circumstance causes the

final value are better So the Green Port Construction may be a trend in port

department

In the results of this thesis Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system are better solutions for Green Port Construction And

especially it can be verified that the port rates and charges always affects port

competitiveness Futhermore the investment for Green Port construction and its

effects have to be verified in the future

51

References

1 Hoyle B S and Smith J 1992 Transport and Development In Modern

transport geography edited by B S Hoyle R D Knowles (London Belhaven

Press)pp11-31

2 Beresford A K C De Souza A J R G and Pettit S J 2005 Stategic

development of liner shipping companies and terminal operators Ocean yearbook

19(Chicago 1L The University of Chicago Press) pp 732-750

3 Heaver T D 2002 Supply chain and logistics management implications for

liner shipping In The handbook of maritime economics and business edited by C

Grammenos (LondonLLP) pp 375-396

4 Park T E (2011) A Study on selection criteria of Green Port and evaluation of

major Korean port A masters thesis of graduate school of Incheon university

52

5 JeongBH (2009)Green port management policy directions in the green

growth era- The case of Gwangyang port in Republic of Korea Journal of Korea

Port Economic Association Vol25(3) p361-384

6 Lee J S Han N H(2009) A study on Green Port Revitalization According to

Air Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

7 Lee Y K Nan J W(2010)Green Logistics Policy Analysis and Implications

of Japan

8 Lee B S (2010)Tendency and Countermeasures on Green Logistics in Port

Logistics Company A masters thesis of graduate school of Korean Maritime

university

9 Lee J S (2009) A Study on Green Port Revitalization According to Air

Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

10 Zhang F Y Li Z Lu X J Yao X L(2008)Competitiveness of Inland

Ports Based on F-AHP

11 Port of Long Beach (2009) Green Port Policy wwwpolbcom

12 The port of Los Angeles wwwportoflosangelesorg

40

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41 CO2 emission reduction policies

U42 Beautiful environment construction in inner harbors U43

Table 421 Details of Level I and Level II values

Level I

indicators Symbol Level II indicators Symbol

Port facilities A1

e-RTGC U11

AMP U12

AGV U13

Port rates and

charges A2

Green ship certification system U21

Incentives on the new clean technology U22

Green Flag (speed reduction incentive) U23

Inland

connection A3

Eco-friendly means of transport U31

Joint distribution U32

Social

circumstances A4

Cost on amount of CO2 emission U41

CO2 emissions reduction policies U42

Beautiful environment construction in inner

harbors U43

41

I Determination of level I indicator weights

As the ports competitiveness evaluation indicators at this level are complex

and the elements are not easily quantified AHP is adopted to determine the

indicator weights with the basic steps as follows

(1) Establish a comparative judgment matrix The comparative judgment

matrix is obtained through comparing contributed proportion of multiple

indicators to the overall target by the judgment scale wherein the fuzzy

judgment number introduced is 1 3 5 7 and 9 and the reciprocal of

such number indicates the important degree of one element relatively to

another The results are shown in next table

Table 422 Comparison matrix of level I indicators

A1 A2 A3 A4

A1 1 15 13 3

A2 5 1 3 7

A3 3 13 1 5

A4 13 17 15 1

(2) Calculate the characteristic vector of the comparative judgment matrix

which refers to the weighted vector of the indicator The writer adopts

42

the geometric method to calculate the characteristic vector The

calculated result is as follows

ω=(012 0560 026 006)T λmax=418 It can be obtained from the table

RI=09 Wherein ω is the characteristic vector corresponding to the

maximum characteristic value λmax of the comparative judgment matrix

namely the weighted vector of the indicator RI is the average

consistency indicator as shown in following table

Table423 Average random consistency indicator RI

Matrix Order

RI

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

0 0 058 09 112 124 132 141

Matrix Order

RI

9 10 11 12 13 14 15

145 149 152 154 156 158 159

(3) Conduct consistency check on the comparative judgment matrix Adopt

the random consistency proportion CR to judge the consistency of the

comparative judgment matrix According to CI= (λmax -n)(n-1) and

CR=CIRI it can be obtained through calculation CR=007lt01 Thus

this comparative judgment matrix has a satisfactory consistency and the

indicator weight coefficient calculated through this matrix is acceptable

43

II Determination of level II indicator weights

The data at this level are the details of level Ⅰ indicator The judgment

matrix obtained through comparing multiple sub-indicators under Level Ⅰ

indicators is adopted to determine the weights of sub-indicators under each

indicator one by one The specific steps are as follows

(1) The experts score the weights within the given range To determine the

weights of several small indicators under the same big indicator it is

supposed that the score of small indicator ｋ under the indicator j made

by the expert i is Xijk wherein i=12n n is the total number of

experts ј=12m m is the total number of LevelⅡ indicator к

=12Oj Oj is the number of small indicators under the big indicator ј

іјк IJK LRC l I j k

(2) The credit rating of the expert і is l l =1 2 3 l =1 indicates this expert

is quite familiar with the evaluated contents l =2 indicator this expert is

44

with the evaluated contents l =3 indicates this expert is not quite familiar

with the evaluated contents yi1 is the=08 yi2 =05 and yi3=1

(3) The comprehensive evaluation score of small indicator l under the

indicator j is as follows

(4) The formula for normalization processing of indicator weights is as

follows and the absolute weight of the indicator set is marked as

q=(q1q2q11)

(5) Because of the same justification and principle we donrsquot give the detail

about the calculation The same with the level Ⅰ calculation we

manipulation data one by one and get 14 results And obtain the average

45

results by weighted average method The results detail as Table for the

final weights of Level-Ⅱ evaluation indicators

Above the calculation process and method are just one of data from the

questionable surveys In this study the final results are got from the

weighted average by the results of each questionable survey

The final results are shown as Table424

Table424 Indicator weights table of indicator system

Level I

indicators Weight LevelⅡ indicators

Relative

weight

Absolute

weight

Importance

percentage

Port Facilities

A1 02735

e-RTGC U11 05506 01506 1506

AMP U12 01648 00451 451

AGV U13 02826 00773 773

Port Rates and

Charges A2

02902

Green ship certification s

ystem U21 04724 01371 1371

Incentives on the new

clean technology U22 02871 00833 833

Green Flag (speed

reduction incentive)U23 02405 00698 698

Inland

connection A3

02865

Eco-friendly means of

transport U31 05942 01702 1702

Joint distribution U32 04058 01163 1163

Social

environmentA4 00863

Cost on amount of CO2

emission U41 03698 00319 319

CO2 emissions reduction

policies U42 02273 00196 196

Beautiful environment

construction in inner

harbors U43

04029 00348 348

46

III Case study

In the questionable survey we also got the mark of Green Port measures

evaluation value of many main ports such as Singapore Port Shanghai Port

Hongkong Port Busan Port LALB Port Rotterdam Port and Yocohama Port

The highest mark is 5 and lowest one is 1

Table425 Evaluation value of many main ports

Singapore

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

LALB

Port

Rotterdam

Port

Yocohama

Port

Port facilities 38000 36000 34000 38182 38000 42000 32000

Port rates and

charges 32000 36000 31000 35455 32000 39000 33000

Inland

connection 39000 34545 35000 29091 35000 45000 36000

Social

circumstance 42000 32727 41000 32000 38000 42727 36000

With the Green Port and Port competitiveness indicator weights results these

ports got the final evaluation value

47

Table426 Final evaluation value on main ports Green Port measures and

competitiveness

Rotterdam

Port

Singapore

Port

LALB

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

Yocohama

Port

394 345 330 330 319 318 317

43 Results Analysis

From the results table we can obtain the many results as following

① The main Green Port measures which are more important to improve port

competitiveness are Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system the indicator weights are 01702 01506 and

01371 among the 11 indicators

② In the Green Port construction Cost on amount of CO2 emission and CO2

emissions reduction policies are the restrictions indicators but the weight

of two indicators are not big 00319 and 00196 So effect on Green Port

construction to port competitiveness does have the weaken capacity but

not clearly strengthen more clearly Thus Green Port construction really

could improve the port competitiveness

48

③ In the case study traditional ports Rotterdam and Singapore Port give us

better examples on Green Port construction especially Rotterdam Port

④ Hongkong Busan and Yocohama Port all got a lower evaluation value

But in detail Hongkong and Yocohama Port got a lower on the port

facilities and rates and charges Busan Port got a higher on the port

facilities and rates and charges but a lower on the inland connection and

social circumstance

⑤ Shanghai Port doesnrsquot have Particular strength factors but the

comprehensive strength is not bad the same as LALB Port

49

Chapter 5 Conclusion

In this thesis the effects of Green Port construction for improving the port

competitiveness have been studied Under the definition of Green Port the

characteristics of Green Port and its effects has been shown by analysing the AHP

method which based on the questionary survey for Green Port specialists and port

officers

Follow the results of analysis on Green Port competitiveness AHP model

Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green ship certification system is

better for Green Port Construction welcome for shipping companies and citizens

who live around the port And in the analysis of Port competitiveness factors port

rates and charges always affects port competitiveness a lot As a trend inland

connection factor abstracts more attention of shipping companies

50

On the trend of port department each port should take a activity to adjust

strategy for improving its competitiveness Such as in the main ports evaluation

Busan port get a high value on port rates and charges and port facilities but as a

lower value on inland connection factor the final value is not as well as we look

forward In the evaluation of Singapore Port through it gets a lower value on rates

and charges higher value on inland connection and social circumstance causes the

final value are better So the Green Port Construction may be a trend in port

department

In the results of this thesis Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system are better solutions for Green Port Construction And

especially it can be verified that the port rates and charges always affects port

competitiveness Futhermore the investment for Green Port construction and its

effects have to be verified in the future

51

References

1 Hoyle B S and Smith J 1992 Transport and Development In Modern

transport geography edited by B S Hoyle R D Knowles (London Belhaven

Press)pp11-31

2 Beresford A K C De Souza A J R G and Pettit S J 2005 Stategic

development of liner shipping companies and terminal operators Ocean yearbook

19(Chicago 1L The University of Chicago Press) pp 732-750

3 Heaver T D 2002 Supply chain and logistics management implications for

liner shipping In The handbook of maritime economics and business edited by C

Grammenos (LondonLLP) pp 375-396

4 Park T E (2011) A Study on selection criteria of Green Port and evaluation of

major Korean port A masters thesis of graduate school of Incheon university

52

5 JeongBH (2009)Green port management policy directions in the green

growth era- The case of Gwangyang port in Republic of Korea Journal of Korea

Port Economic Association Vol25(3) p361-384

6 Lee J S Han N H(2009) A study on Green Port Revitalization According to

Air Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

7 Lee Y K Nan J W(2010)Green Logistics Policy Analysis and Implications

of Japan

8 Lee B S (2010)Tendency and Countermeasures on Green Logistics in Port

Logistics Company A masters thesis of graduate school of Korean Maritime

university

9 Lee J S (2009) A Study on Green Port Revitalization According to Air

Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

10 Zhang F Y Li Z Lu X J Yao X L(2008)Competitiveness of Inland

Ports Based on F-AHP

11 Port of Long Beach (2009) Green Port Policy wwwpolbcom

12 The port of Los Angeles wwwportoflosangelesorg

41

I Determination of level I indicator weights

As the ports competitiveness evaluation indicators at this level are complex

and the elements are not easily quantified AHP is adopted to determine the

indicator weights with the basic steps as follows

(1) Establish a comparative judgment matrix The comparative judgment

matrix is obtained through comparing contributed proportion of multiple

indicators to the overall target by the judgment scale wherein the fuzzy

judgment number introduced is 1 3 5 7 and 9 and the reciprocal of

such number indicates the important degree of one element relatively to

another The results are shown in next table

Table 422 Comparison matrix of level I indicators

A1 A2 A3 A4

A1 1 15 13 3

A2 5 1 3 7

A3 3 13 1 5

A4 13 17 15 1

(2) Calculate the characteristic vector of the comparative judgment matrix

which refers to the weighted vector of the indicator The writer adopts

42

the geometric method to calculate the characteristic vector The

calculated result is as follows

ω=(012 0560 026 006)T λmax=418 It can be obtained from the table

RI=09 Wherein ω is the characteristic vector corresponding to the

maximum characteristic value λmax of the comparative judgment matrix

namely the weighted vector of the indicator RI is the average

consistency indicator as shown in following table

Table423 Average random consistency indicator RI

Matrix Order

RI

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

0 0 058 09 112 124 132 141

Matrix Order

RI

9 10 11 12 13 14 15

145 149 152 154 156 158 159

(3) Conduct consistency check on the comparative judgment matrix Adopt

the random consistency proportion CR to judge the consistency of the

comparative judgment matrix According to CI= (λmax -n)(n-1) and

CR=CIRI it can be obtained through calculation CR=007lt01 Thus

this comparative judgment matrix has a satisfactory consistency and the

indicator weight coefficient calculated through this matrix is acceptable

43

II Determination of level II indicator weights

The data at this level are the details of level Ⅰ indicator The judgment

matrix obtained through comparing multiple sub-indicators under Level Ⅰ

indicators is adopted to determine the weights of sub-indicators under each

indicator one by one The specific steps are as follows

(1) The experts score the weights within the given range To determine the

weights of several small indicators under the same big indicator it is

supposed that the score of small indicator ｋ under the indicator j made

by the expert i is Xijk wherein i=12n n is the total number of

experts ј=12m m is the total number of LevelⅡ indicator к

=12Oj Oj is the number of small indicators under the big indicator ј

іјк IJK LRC l I j k

(2) The credit rating of the expert і is l l =1 2 3 l =1 indicates this expert

is quite familiar with the evaluated contents l =2 indicator this expert is

44

with the evaluated contents l =3 indicates this expert is not quite familiar

with the evaluated contents yi1 is the=08 yi2 =05 and yi3=1

(3) The comprehensive evaluation score of small indicator l under the

indicator j is as follows

(4) The formula for normalization processing of indicator weights is as

follows and the absolute weight of the indicator set is marked as

q=(q1q2q11)

(5) Because of the same justification and principle we donrsquot give the detail

about the calculation The same with the level Ⅰ calculation we

manipulation data one by one and get 14 results And obtain the average

45

results by weighted average method The results detail as Table for the

final weights of Level-Ⅱ evaluation indicators

Above the calculation process and method are just one of data from the

questionable surveys In this study the final results are got from the

weighted average by the results of each questionable survey

The final results are shown as Table424

Table424 Indicator weights table of indicator system

Level I

indicators Weight LevelⅡ indicators

Relative

weight

Absolute

weight

Importance

percentage

Port Facilities

A1 02735

e-RTGC U11 05506 01506 1506

AMP U12 01648 00451 451

AGV U13 02826 00773 773

Port Rates and

Charges A2

02902

Green ship certification s

ystem U21 04724 01371 1371

Incentives on the new

clean technology U22 02871 00833 833

Green Flag (speed

reduction incentive)U23 02405 00698 698

Inland

connection A3

02865

Eco-friendly means of

transport U31 05942 01702 1702

Joint distribution U32 04058 01163 1163

Social

environmentA4 00863

Cost on amount of CO2

emission U41 03698 00319 319

CO2 emissions reduction

policies U42 02273 00196 196

Beautiful environment

construction in inner

harbors U43

04029 00348 348

46

III Case study

In the questionable survey we also got the mark of Green Port measures

evaluation value of many main ports such as Singapore Port Shanghai Port

Hongkong Port Busan Port LALB Port Rotterdam Port and Yocohama Port

The highest mark is 5 and lowest one is 1

Table425 Evaluation value of many main ports

Singapore

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

LALB

Port

Rotterdam

Port

Yocohama

Port

Port facilities 38000 36000 34000 38182 38000 42000 32000

Port rates and

charges 32000 36000 31000 35455 32000 39000 33000

Inland

connection 39000 34545 35000 29091 35000 45000 36000

Social

circumstance 42000 32727 41000 32000 38000 42727 36000

With the Green Port and Port competitiveness indicator weights results these

ports got the final evaluation value

47

Table426 Final evaluation value on main ports Green Port measures and

competitiveness

Rotterdam

Port

Singapore

Port

LALB

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

Yocohama

Port

394 345 330 330 319 318 317

43 Results Analysis

From the results table we can obtain the many results as following

① The main Green Port measures which are more important to improve port

competitiveness are Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system the indicator weights are 01702 01506 and

01371 among the 11 indicators

② In the Green Port construction Cost on amount of CO2 emission and CO2

emissions reduction policies are the restrictions indicators but the weight

of two indicators are not big 00319 and 00196 So effect on Green Port

construction to port competitiveness does have the weaken capacity but

not clearly strengthen more clearly Thus Green Port construction really

could improve the port competitiveness

48

③ In the case study traditional ports Rotterdam and Singapore Port give us

better examples on Green Port construction especially Rotterdam Port

④ Hongkong Busan and Yocohama Port all got a lower evaluation value

But in detail Hongkong and Yocohama Port got a lower on the port

facilities and rates and charges Busan Port got a higher on the port

facilities and rates and charges but a lower on the inland connection and

social circumstance

⑤ Shanghai Port doesnrsquot have Particular strength factors but the

comprehensive strength is not bad the same as LALB Port

49

Chapter 5 Conclusion

In this thesis the effects of Green Port construction for improving the port

competitiveness have been studied Under the definition of Green Port the

characteristics of Green Port and its effects has been shown by analysing the AHP

method which based on the questionary survey for Green Port specialists and port

officers

Follow the results of analysis on Green Port competitiveness AHP model

Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green ship certification system is

better for Green Port Construction welcome for shipping companies and citizens

who live around the port And in the analysis of Port competitiveness factors port

rates and charges always affects port competitiveness a lot As a trend inland

connection factor abstracts more attention of shipping companies

50

On the trend of port department each port should take a activity to adjust

strategy for improving its competitiveness Such as in the main ports evaluation

Busan port get a high value on port rates and charges and port facilities but as a

lower value on inland connection factor the final value is not as well as we look

forward In the evaluation of Singapore Port through it gets a lower value on rates

and charges higher value on inland connection and social circumstance causes the

final value are better So the Green Port Construction may be a trend in port

department

In the results of this thesis Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system are better solutions for Green Port Construction And

especially it can be verified that the port rates and charges always affects port

competitiveness Futhermore the investment for Green Port construction and its

effects have to be verified in the future

51

References

1 Hoyle B S and Smith J 1992 Transport and Development In Modern

transport geography edited by B S Hoyle R D Knowles (London Belhaven

Press)pp11-31

2 Beresford A K C De Souza A J R G and Pettit S J 2005 Stategic

development of liner shipping companies and terminal operators Ocean yearbook

19(Chicago 1L The University of Chicago Press) pp 732-750

3 Heaver T D 2002 Supply chain and logistics management implications for

liner shipping In The handbook of maritime economics and business edited by C

Grammenos (LondonLLP) pp 375-396

4 Park T E (2011) A Study on selection criteria of Green Port and evaluation of

major Korean port A masters thesis of graduate school of Incheon university

52

5 JeongBH (2009)Green port management policy directions in the green

growth era- The case of Gwangyang port in Republic of Korea Journal of Korea

Port Economic Association Vol25(3) p361-384

6 Lee J S Han N H(2009) A study on Green Port Revitalization According to

Air Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

7 Lee Y K Nan J W(2010)Green Logistics Policy Analysis and Implications

of Japan

8 Lee B S (2010)Tendency and Countermeasures on Green Logistics in Port

Logistics Company A masters thesis of graduate school of Korean Maritime

university

9 Lee J S (2009) A Study on Green Port Revitalization According to Air

Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

10 Zhang F Y Li Z Lu X J Yao X L(2008)Competitiveness of Inland

Ports Based on F-AHP

11 Port of Long Beach (2009) Green Port Policy wwwpolbcom

12 The port of Los Angeles wwwportoflosangelesorg

42

the geometric method to calculate the characteristic vector The

calculated result is as follows

ω=(012 0560 026 006)T λmax=418 It can be obtained from the table

RI=09 Wherein ω is the characteristic vector corresponding to the

maximum characteristic value λmax of the comparative judgment matrix

namely the weighted vector of the indicator RI is the average

consistency indicator as shown in following table

Table423 Average random consistency indicator RI

Matrix Order

RI

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

0 0 058 09 112 124 132 141

Matrix Order

RI

9 10 11 12 13 14 15

145 149 152 154 156 158 159

(3) Conduct consistency check on the comparative judgment matrix Adopt

the random consistency proportion CR to judge the consistency of the

comparative judgment matrix According to CI= (λmax -n)(n-1) and

CR=CIRI it can be obtained through calculation CR=007lt01 Thus

this comparative judgment matrix has a satisfactory consistency and the

indicator weight coefficient calculated through this matrix is acceptable

43

II Determination of level II indicator weights

The data at this level are the details of level Ⅰ indicator The judgment

matrix obtained through comparing multiple sub-indicators under Level Ⅰ

indicators is adopted to determine the weights of sub-indicators under each

indicator one by one The specific steps are as follows

(1) The experts score the weights within the given range To determine the

weights of several small indicators under the same big indicator it is

supposed that the score of small indicator ｋ under the indicator j made

by the expert i is Xijk wherein i=12n n is the total number of

experts ј=12m m is the total number of LevelⅡ indicator к

=12Oj Oj is the number of small indicators under the big indicator ј

іјк IJK LRC l I j k

(2) The credit rating of the expert і is l l =1 2 3 l =1 indicates this expert

is quite familiar with the evaluated contents l =2 indicator this expert is

44

with the evaluated contents l =3 indicates this expert is not quite familiar

with the evaluated contents yi1 is the=08 yi2 =05 and yi3=1

(3) The comprehensive evaluation score of small indicator l under the

indicator j is as follows

(4) The formula for normalization processing of indicator weights is as

follows and the absolute weight of the indicator set is marked as

q=(q1q2q11)

(5) Because of the same justification and principle we donrsquot give the detail

about the calculation The same with the level Ⅰ calculation we

manipulation data one by one and get 14 results And obtain the average

45

results by weighted average method The results detail as Table for the

final weights of Level-Ⅱ evaluation indicators

Above the calculation process and method are just one of data from the

questionable surveys In this study the final results are got from the

weighted average by the results of each questionable survey

The final results are shown as Table424

Table424 Indicator weights table of indicator system

Level I

indicators Weight LevelⅡ indicators

Relative

weight

Absolute

weight

Importance

percentage

Port Facilities

A1 02735

e-RTGC U11 05506 01506 1506

AMP U12 01648 00451 451

AGV U13 02826 00773 773

Port Rates and

Charges A2

02902

Green ship certification s

ystem U21 04724 01371 1371

Incentives on the new

clean technology U22 02871 00833 833

Green Flag (speed

reduction incentive)U23 02405 00698 698

Inland

connection A3

02865

Eco-friendly means of

transport U31 05942 01702 1702

Joint distribution U32 04058 01163 1163

Social

environmentA4 00863

Cost on amount of CO2

emission U41 03698 00319 319

CO2 emissions reduction

policies U42 02273 00196 196

Beautiful environment

construction in inner

harbors U43

04029 00348 348

46

III Case study

In the questionable survey we also got the mark of Green Port measures

evaluation value of many main ports such as Singapore Port Shanghai Port

Hongkong Port Busan Port LALB Port Rotterdam Port and Yocohama Port

The highest mark is 5 and lowest one is 1

Table425 Evaluation value of many main ports

Singapore

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

LALB

Port

Rotterdam

Port

Yocohama

Port

Port facilities 38000 36000 34000 38182 38000 42000 32000

Port rates and

charges 32000 36000 31000 35455 32000 39000 33000

Inland

connection 39000 34545 35000 29091 35000 45000 36000

Social

circumstance 42000 32727 41000 32000 38000 42727 36000

With the Green Port and Port competitiveness indicator weights results these

ports got the final evaluation value

47

Table426 Final evaluation value on main ports Green Port measures and

competitiveness

Rotterdam

Port

Singapore

Port

LALB

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

Yocohama

Port

394 345 330 330 319 318 317

43 Results Analysis

From the results table we can obtain the many results as following

① The main Green Port measures which are more important to improve port

competitiveness are Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system the indicator weights are 01702 01506 and

01371 among the 11 indicators

② In the Green Port construction Cost on amount of CO2 emission and CO2

emissions reduction policies are the restrictions indicators but the weight

of two indicators are not big 00319 and 00196 So effect on Green Port

construction to port competitiveness does have the weaken capacity but

not clearly strengthen more clearly Thus Green Port construction really

could improve the port competitiveness

48

③ In the case study traditional ports Rotterdam and Singapore Port give us

better examples on Green Port construction especially Rotterdam Port

④ Hongkong Busan and Yocohama Port all got a lower evaluation value

But in detail Hongkong and Yocohama Port got a lower on the port

facilities and rates and charges Busan Port got a higher on the port

facilities and rates and charges but a lower on the inland connection and

social circumstance

⑤ Shanghai Port doesnrsquot have Particular strength factors but the

comprehensive strength is not bad the same as LALB Port

49

Chapter 5 Conclusion

In this thesis the effects of Green Port construction for improving the port

competitiveness have been studied Under the definition of Green Port the

characteristics of Green Port and its effects has been shown by analysing the AHP

method which based on the questionary survey for Green Port specialists and port

officers

Follow the results of analysis on Green Port competitiveness AHP model

Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green ship certification system is

better for Green Port Construction welcome for shipping companies and citizens

who live around the port And in the analysis of Port competitiveness factors port

rates and charges always affects port competitiveness a lot As a trend inland

connection factor abstracts more attention of shipping companies

50

On the trend of port department each port should take a activity to adjust

strategy for improving its competitiveness Such as in the main ports evaluation

Busan port get a high value on port rates and charges and port facilities but as a

lower value on inland connection factor the final value is not as well as we look

forward In the evaluation of Singapore Port through it gets a lower value on rates

and charges higher value on inland connection and social circumstance causes the

final value are better So the Green Port Construction may be a trend in port

department

In the results of this thesis Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system are better solutions for Green Port Construction And

especially it can be verified that the port rates and charges always affects port

competitiveness Futhermore the investment for Green Port construction and its

effects have to be verified in the future

51

References

1 Hoyle B S and Smith J 1992 Transport and Development In Modern

transport geography edited by B S Hoyle R D Knowles (London Belhaven

Press)pp11-31

2 Beresford A K C De Souza A J R G and Pettit S J 2005 Stategic

development of liner shipping companies and terminal operators Ocean yearbook

19(Chicago 1L The University of Chicago Press) pp 732-750

3 Heaver T D 2002 Supply chain and logistics management implications for

liner shipping In The handbook of maritime economics and business edited by C

Grammenos (LondonLLP) pp 375-396

4 Park T E (2011) A Study on selection criteria of Green Port and evaluation of

major Korean port A masters thesis of graduate school of Incheon university

52

5 JeongBH (2009)Green port management policy directions in the green

growth era- The case of Gwangyang port in Republic of Korea Journal of Korea

Port Economic Association Vol25(3) p361-384

6 Lee J S Han N H(2009) A study on Green Port Revitalization According to

Air Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

7 Lee Y K Nan J W(2010)Green Logistics Policy Analysis and Implications

of Japan

8 Lee B S (2010)Tendency and Countermeasures on Green Logistics in Port

Logistics Company A masters thesis of graduate school of Korean Maritime

university

9 Lee J S (2009) A Study on Green Port Revitalization According to Air

Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

10 Zhang F Y Li Z Lu X J Yao X L(2008)Competitiveness of Inland

Ports Based on F-AHP

11 Port of Long Beach (2009) Green Port Policy wwwpolbcom

12 The port of Los Angeles wwwportoflosangelesorg

43

II Determination of level II indicator weights

The data at this level are the details of level Ⅰ indicator The judgment

matrix obtained through comparing multiple sub-indicators under Level Ⅰ

indicators is adopted to determine the weights of sub-indicators under each

indicator one by one The specific steps are as follows

(1) The experts score the weights within the given range To determine the

weights of several small indicators under the same big indicator it is

supposed that the score of small indicator ｋ under the indicator j made

by the expert i is Xijk wherein i=12n n is the total number of

experts ј=12m m is the total number of LevelⅡ indicator к

=12Oj Oj is the number of small indicators under the big indicator ј

іјк IJK LRC l I j k

(2) The credit rating of the expert і is l l =1 2 3 l =1 indicates this expert

is quite familiar with the evaluated contents l =2 indicator this expert is

44

with the evaluated contents l =3 indicates this expert is not quite familiar

with the evaluated contents yi1 is the=08 yi2 =05 and yi3=1

(3) The comprehensive evaluation score of small indicator l under the

indicator j is as follows

(4) The formula for normalization processing of indicator weights is as

follows and the absolute weight of the indicator set is marked as

q=(q1q2q11)

(5) Because of the same justification and principle we donrsquot give the detail

about the calculation The same with the level Ⅰ calculation we

manipulation data one by one and get 14 results And obtain the average

45

results by weighted average method The results detail as Table for the

final weights of Level-Ⅱ evaluation indicators

Above the calculation process and method are just one of data from the

questionable surveys In this study the final results are got from the

weighted average by the results of each questionable survey

The final results are shown as Table424

Table424 Indicator weights table of indicator system

Level I

indicators Weight LevelⅡ indicators

Relative

weight

Absolute

weight

Importance

percentage

Port Facilities

A1 02735

e-RTGC U11 05506 01506 1506

AMP U12 01648 00451 451

AGV U13 02826 00773 773

Port Rates and

Charges A2

02902

Green ship certification s

ystem U21 04724 01371 1371

Incentives on the new

clean technology U22 02871 00833 833

Green Flag (speed

reduction incentive)U23 02405 00698 698

Inland

connection A3

02865

Eco-friendly means of

transport U31 05942 01702 1702

Joint distribution U32 04058 01163 1163

Social

environmentA4 00863

Cost on amount of CO2

emission U41 03698 00319 319

CO2 emissions reduction

policies U42 02273 00196 196

Beautiful environment

construction in inner

harbors U43

04029 00348 348

46

III Case study

In the questionable survey we also got the mark of Green Port measures

evaluation value of many main ports such as Singapore Port Shanghai Port

Hongkong Port Busan Port LALB Port Rotterdam Port and Yocohama Port

The highest mark is 5 and lowest one is 1

Table425 Evaluation value of many main ports

Singapore

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

LALB

Port

Rotterdam

Port

Yocohama

Port

Port facilities 38000 36000 34000 38182 38000 42000 32000

Port rates and

charges 32000 36000 31000 35455 32000 39000 33000

Inland

connection 39000 34545 35000 29091 35000 45000 36000

Social

circumstance 42000 32727 41000 32000 38000 42727 36000

With the Green Port and Port competitiveness indicator weights results these

ports got the final evaluation value

47

Table426 Final evaluation value on main ports Green Port measures and

competitiveness

Rotterdam

Port

Singapore

Port

LALB

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

Yocohama

Port

394 345 330 330 319 318 317

43 Results Analysis

From the results table we can obtain the many results as following

① The main Green Port measures which are more important to improve port

competitiveness are Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system the indicator weights are 01702 01506 and

01371 among the 11 indicators

② In the Green Port construction Cost on amount of CO2 emission and CO2

emissions reduction policies are the restrictions indicators but the weight

of two indicators are not big 00319 and 00196 So effect on Green Port

construction to port competitiveness does have the weaken capacity but

not clearly strengthen more clearly Thus Green Port construction really

could improve the port competitiveness

48

③ In the case study traditional ports Rotterdam and Singapore Port give us

better examples on Green Port construction especially Rotterdam Port

④ Hongkong Busan and Yocohama Port all got a lower evaluation value

But in detail Hongkong and Yocohama Port got a lower on the port

facilities and rates and charges Busan Port got a higher on the port

facilities and rates and charges but a lower on the inland connection and

social circumstance

⑤ Shanghai Port doesnrsquot have Particular strength factors but the

comprehensive strength is not bad the same as LALB Port

49

Chapter 5 Conclusion

In this thesis the effects of Green Port construction for improving the port

competitiveness have been studied Under the definition of Green Port the

characteristics of Green Port and its effects has been shown by analysing the AHP

method which based on the questionary survey for Green Port specialists and port

officers

Follow the results of analysis on Green Port competitiveness AHP model

Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green ship certification system is

better for Green Port Construction welcome for shipping companies and citizens

who live around the port And in the analysis of Port competitiveness factors port

rates and charges always affects port competitiveness a lot As a trend inland

connection factor abstracts more attention of shipping companies

50

On the trend of port department each port should take a activity to adjust

strategy for improving its competitiveness Such as in the main ports evaluation

Busan port get a high value on port rates and charges and port facilities but as a

lower value on inland connection factor the final value is not as well as we look

forward In the evaluation of Singapore Port through it gets a lower value on rates

and charges higher value on inland connection and social circumstance causes the

final value are better So the Green Port Construction may be a trend in port

department

In the results of this thesis Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system are better solutions for Green Port Construction And

especially it can be verified that the port rates and charges always affects port

competitiveness Futhermore the investment for Green Port construction and its

effects have to be verified in the future

51

References

1 Hoyle B S and Smith J 1992 Transport and Development In Modern

transport geography edited by B S Hoyle R D Knowles (London Belhaven

Press)pp11-31

2 Beresford A K C De Souza A J R G and Pettit S J 2005 Stategic

development of liner shipping companies and terminal operators Ocean yearbook

19(Chicago 1L The University of Chicago Press) pp 732-750

3 Heaver T D 2002 Supply chain and logistics management implications for

liner shipping In The handbook of maritime economics and business edited by C

Grammenos (LondonLLP) pp 375-396

4 Park T E (2011) A Study on selection criteria of Green Port and evaluation of

major Korean port A masters thesis of graduate school of Incheon university

52

5 JeongBH (2009)Green port management policy directions in the green

growth era- The case of Gwangyang port in Republic of Korea Journal of Korea

Port Economic Association Vol25(3) p361-384

6 Lee J S Han N H(2009) A study on Green Port Revitalization According to

Air Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

7 Lee Y K Nan J W(2010)Green Logistics Policy Analysis and Implications

of Japan

8 Lee B S (2010)Tendency and Countermeasures on Green Logistics in Port

Logistics Company A masters thesis of graduate school of Korean Maritime

university

9 Lee J S (2009) A Study on Green Port Revitalization According to Air

Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

10 Zhang F Y Li Z Lu X J Yao X L(2008)Competitiveness of Inland

Ports Based on F-AHP

11 Port of Long Beach (2009) Green Port Policy wwwpolbcom

12 The port of Los Angeles wwwportoflosangelesorg

44

with the evaluated contents l =3 indicates this expert is not quite familiar

with the evaluated contents yi1 is the=08 yi2 =05 and yi3=1

(3) The comprehensive evaluation score of small indicator l under the

indicator j is as follows

(4) The formula for normalization processing of indicator weights is as

follows and the absolute weight of the indicator set is marked as

q=(q1q2q11)

(5) Because of the same justification and principle we donrsquot give the detail

about the calculation The same with the level Ⅰ calculation we

manipulation data one by one and get 14 results And obtain the average

45

results by weighted average method The results detail as Table for the

final weights of Level-Ⅱ evaluation indicators

Above the calculation process and method are just one of data from the

questionable surveys In this study the final results are got from the

weighted average by the results of each questionable survey

The final results are shown as Table424

Table424 Indicator weights table of indicator system

Level I

indicators Weight LevelⅡ indicators

Relative

weight

Absolute

weight

Importance

percentage

Port Facilities

A1 02735

e-RTGC U11 05506 01506 1506

AMP U12 01648 00451 451

AGV U13 02826 00773 773

Port Rates and

Charges A2

02902

Green ship certification s

ystem U21 04724 01371 1371

Incentives on the new

clean technology U22 02871 00833 833

Green Flag (speed

reduction incentive)U23 02405 00698 698

Inland

connection A3

02865

Eco-friendly means of

transport U31 05942 01702 1702

Joint distribution U32 04058 01163 1163

Social

environmentA4 00863

Cost on amount of CO2

emission U41 03698 00319 319

CO2 emissions reduction

policies U42 02273 00196 196

Beautiful environment

construction in inner

harbors U43

04029 00348 348

46

III Case study

In the questionable survey we also got the mark of Green Port measures

evaluation value of many main ports such as Singapore Port Shanghai Port

Hongkong Port Busan Port LALB Port Rotterdam Port and Yocohama Port

The highest mark is 5 and lowest one is 1

Table425 Evaluation value of many main ports

Singapore

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

LALB

Port

Rotterdam

Port

Yocohama

Port

Port facilities 38000 36000 34000 38182 38000 42000 32000

Port rates and

charges 32000 36000 31000 35455 32000 39000 33000

Inland

connection 39000 34545 35000 29091 35000 45000 36000

Social

circumstance 42000 32727 41000 32000 38000 42727 36000

With the Green Port and Port competitiveness indicator weights results these

ports got the final evaluation value

47

Table426 Final evaluation value on main ports Green Port measures and

competitiveness

Rotterdam

Port

Singapore

Port

LALB

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

Yocohama

Port

394 345 330 330 319 318 317

43 Results Analysis

From the results table we can obtain the many results as following

① The main Green Port measures which are more important to improve port

competitiveness are Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system the indicator weights are 01702 01506 and

01371 among the 11 indicators

② In the Green Port construction Cost on amount of CO2 emission and CO2

emissions reduction policies are the restrictions indicators but the weight

of two indicators are not big 00319 and 00196 So effect on Green Port

construction to port competitiveness does have the weaken capacity but

not clearly strengthen more clearly Thus Green Port construction really

could improve the port competitiveness

48

③ In the case study traditional ports Rotterdam and Singapore Port give us

better examples on Green Port construction especially Rotterdam Port

④ Hongkong Busan and Yocohama Port all got a lower evaluation value

But in detail Hongkong and Yocohama Port got a lower on the port

facilities and rates and charges Busan Port got a higher on the port

facilities and rates and charges but a lower on the inland connection and

social circumstance

⑤ Shanghai Port doesnrsquot have Particular strength factors but the

comprehensive strength is not bad the same as LALB Port

49

Chapter 5 Conclusion

In this thesis the effects of Green Port construction for improving the port

competitiveness have been studied Under the definition of Green Port the

characteristics of Green Port and its effects has been shown by analysing the AHP

method which based on the questionary survey for Green Port specialists and port

officers

Follow the results of analysis on Green Port competitiveness AHP model

Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green ship certification system is

better for Green Port Construction welcome for shipping companies and citizens

who live around the port And in the analysis of Port competitiveness factors port

rates and charges always affects port competitiveness a lot As a trend inland

connection factor abstracts more attention of shipping companies

50

On the trend of port department each port should take a activity to adjust

strategy for improving its competitiveness Such as in the main ports evaluation

Busan port get a high value on port rates and charges and port facilities but as a

lower value on inland connection factor the final value is not as well as we look

forward In the evaluation of Singapore Port through it gets a lower value on rates

and charges higher value on inland connection and social circumstance causes the

final value are better So the Green Port Construction may be a trend in port

department

In the results of this thesis Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system are better solutions for Green Port Construction And

especially it can be verified that the port rates and charges always affects port

competitiveness Futhermore the investment for Green Port construction and its

effects have to be verified in the future

51

References

1 Hoyle B S and Smith J 1992 Transport and Development In Modern

transport geography edited by B S Hoyle R D Knowles (London Belhaven

Press)pp11-31

2 Beresford A K C De Souza A J R G and Pettit S J 2005 Stategic

development of liner shipping companies and terminal operators Ocean yearbook

19(Chicago 1L The University of Chicago Press) pp 732-750

3 Heaver T D 2002 Supply chain and logistics management implications for

liner shipping In The handbook of maritime economics and business edited by C

Grammenos (LondonLLP) pp 375-396

4 Park T E (2011) A Study on selection criteria of Green Port and evaluation of

major Korean port A masters thesis of graduate school of Incheon university

52

5 JeongBH (2009)Green port management policy directions in the green

growth era- The case of Gwangyang port in Republic of Korea Journal of Korea

Port Economic Association Vol25(3) p361-384

6 Lee J S Han N H(2009) A study on Green Port Revitalization According to

Air Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

7 Lee Y K Nan J W(2010)Green Logistics Policy Analysis and Implications

of Japan

8 Lee B S (2010)Tendency and Countermeasures on Green Logistics in Port

Logistics Company A masters thesis of graduate school of Korean Maritime

university

9 Lee J S (2009) A Study on Green Port Revitalization According to Air

Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

10 Zhang F Y Li Z Lu X J Yao X L(2008)Competitiveness of Inland

Ports Based on F-AHP

11 Port of Long Beach (2009) Green Port Policy wwwpolbcom

12 The port of Los Angeles wwwportoflosangelesorg

45

results by weighted average method The results detail as Table for the

final weights of Level-Ⅱ evaluation indicators

Above the calculation process and method are just one of data from the

questionable surveys In this study the final results are got from the

weighted average by the results of each questionable survey

The final results are shown as Table424

Table424 Indicator weights table of indicator system

Level I

indicators Weight LevelⅡ indicators

Relative

weight

Absolute

weight

Importance

percentage

Port Facilities

A1 02735

e-RTGC U11 05506 01506 1506

AMP U12 01648 00451 451

AGV U13 02826 00773 773

Port Rates and

Charges A2

02902

Green ship certification s

ystem U21 04724 01371 1371

Incentives on the new

clean technology U22 02871 00833 833

Green Flag (speed

reduction incentive)U23 02405 00698 698

Inland

connection A3

02865

Eco-friendly means of

transport U31 05942 01702 1702

Joint distribution U32 04058 01163 1163

Social

environmentA4 00863

Cost on amount of CO2

emission U41 03698 00319 319

CO2 emissions reduction

policies U42 02273 00196 196

Beautiful environment

construction in inner

harbors U43

04029 00348 348

46

III Case study

In the questionable survey we also got the mark of Green Port measures

evaluation value of many main ports such as Singapore Port Shanghai Port

Hongkong Port Busan Port LALB Port Rotterdam Port and Yocohama Port

The highest mark is 5 and lowest one is 1

Table425 Evaluation value of many main ports

Singapore

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

LALB

Port

Rotterdam

Port

Yocohama

Port

Port facilities 38000 36000 34000 38182 38000 42000 32000

Port rates and

charges 32000 36000 31000 35455 32000 39000 33000

Inland

connection 39000 34545 35000 29091 35000 45000 36000

Social

circumstance 42000 32727 41000 32000 38000 42727 36000

With the Green Port and Port competitiveness indicator weights results these

ports got the final evaluation value

47

Table426 Final evaluation value on main ports Green Port measures and

competitiveness

Rotterdam

Port

Singapore

Port

LALB

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

Yocohama

Port

394 345 330 330 319 318 317

43 Results Analysis

From the results table we can obtain the many results as following

① The main Green Port measures which are more important to improve port

competitiveness are Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system the indicator weights are 01702 01506 and

01371 among the 11 indicators

② In the Green Port construction Cost on amount of CO2 emission and CO2

emissions reduction policies are the restrictions indicators but the weight

of two indicators are not big 00319 and 00196 So effect on Green Port

construction to port competitiveness does have the weaken capacity but

not clearly strengthen more clearly Thus Green Port construction really

could improve the port competitiveness

48

③ In the case study traditional ports Rotterdam and Singapore Port give us

better examples on Green Port construction especially Rotterdam Port

④ Hongkong Busan and Yocohama Port all got a lower evaluation value

But in detail Hongkong and Yocohama Port got a lower on the port

facilities and rates and charges Busan Port got a higher on the port

facilities and rates and charges but a lower on the inland connection and

social circumstance

⑤ Shanghai Port doesnrsquot have Particular strength factors but the

comprehensive strength is not bad the same as LALB Port

49

Chapter 5 Conclusion

In this thesis the effects of Green Port construction for improving the port

competitiveness have been studied Under the definition of Green Port the

characteristics of Green Port and its effects has been shown by analysing the AHP

method which based on the questionary survey for Green Port specialists and port

officers

Follow the results of analysis on Green Port competitiveness AHP model

Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green ship certification system is

better for Green Port Construction welcome for shipping companies and citizens

who live around the port And in the analysis of Port competitiveness factors port

rates and charges always affects port competitiveness a lot As a trend inland

connection factor abstracts more attention of shipping companies

50

On the trend of port department each port should take a activity to adjust

strategy for improving its competitiveness Such as in the main ports evaluation

Busan port get a high value on port rates and charges and port facilities but as a

lower value on inland connection factor the final value is not as well as we look

forward In the evaluation of Singapore Port through it gets a lower value on rates

and charges higher value on inland connection and social circumstance causes the

final value are better So the Green Port Construction may be a trend in port

department

In the results of this thesis Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system are better solutions for Green Port Construction And

especially it can be verified that the port rates and charges always affects port

competitiveness Futhermore the investment for Green Port construction and its

effects have to be verified in the future

51

References

1 Hoyle B S and Smith J 1992 Transport and Development In Modern

transport geography edited by B S Hoyle R D Knowles (London Belhaven

Press)pp11-31

2 Beresford A K C De Souza A J R G and Pettit S J 2005 Stategic

development of liner shipping companies and terminal operators Ocean yearbook

19(Chicago 1L The University of Chicago Press) pp 732-750

3 Heaver T D 2002 Supply chain and logistics management implications for

liner shipping In The handbook of maritime economics and business edited by C

Grammenos (LondonLLP) pp 375-396

4 Park T E (2011) A Study on selection criteria of Green Port and evaluation of

major Korean port A masters thesis of graduate school of Incheon university

52

5 JeongBH (2009)Green port management policy directions in the green

growth era- The case of Gwangyang port in Republic of Korea Journal of Korea

Port Economic Association Vol25(3) p361-384

6 Lee J S Han N H(2009) A study on Green Port Revitalization According to

Air Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

7 Lee Y K Nan J W(2010)Green Logistics Policy Analysis and Implications

of Japan

8 Lee B S (2010)Tendency and Countermeasures on Green Logistics in Port

Logistics Company A masters thesis of graduate school of Korean Maritime

university

9 Lee J S (2009) A Study on Green Port Revitalization According to Air

Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

10 Zhang F Y Li Z Lu X J Yao X L(2008)Competitiveness of Inland

Ports Based on F-AHP

11 Port of Long Beach (2009) Green Port Policy wwwpolbcom

12 The port of Los Angeles wwwportoflosangelesorg

46

III Case study

In the questionable survey we also got the mark of Green Port measures

evaluation value of many main ports such as Singapore Port Shanghai Port

Hongkong Port Busan Port LALB Port Rotterdam Port and Yocohama Port

The highest mark is 5 and lowest one is 1

Table425 Evaluation value of many main ports

Singapore

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

LALB

Port

Rotterdam

Port

Yocohama

Port

Port facilities 38000 36000 34000 38182 38000 42000 32000

Port rates and

charges 32000 36000 31000 35455 32000 39000 33000

Inland

connection 39000 34545 35000 29091 35000 45000 36000

Social

circumstance 42000 32727 41000 32000 38000 42727 36000

With the Green Port and Port competitiveness indicator weights results these

ports got the final evaluation value

47

Table426 Final evaluation value on main ports Green Port measures and

competitiveness

Rotterdam

Port

Singapore

Port

LALB

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

Yocohama

Port

394 345 330 330 319 318 317

43 Results Analysis

From the results table we can obtain the many results as following

① The main Green Port measures which are more important to improve port

competitiveness are Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system the indicator weights are 01702 01506 and

01371 among the 11 indicators

② In the Green Port construction Cost on amount of CO2 emission and CO2

emissions reduction policies are the restrictions indicators but the weight

of two indicators are not big 00319 and 00196 So effect on Green Port

construction to port competitiveness does have the weaken capacity but

not clearly strengthen more clearly Thus Green Port construction really

could improve the port competitiveness

48

③ In the case study traditional ports Rotterdam and Singapore Port give us

better examples on Green Port construction especially Rotterdam Port

④ Hongkong Busan and Yocohama Port all got a lower evaluation value

But in detail Hongkong and Yocohama Port got a lower on the port

facilities and rates and charges Busan Port got a higher on the port

facilities and rates and charges but a lower on the inland connection and

social circumstance

⑤ Shanghai Port doesnrsquot have Particular strength factors but the

comprehensive strength is not bad the same as LALB Port

49

Chapter 5 Conclusion

In this thesis the effects of Green Port construction for improving the port

competitiveness have been studied Under the definition of Green Port the

characteristics of Green Port and its effects has been shown by analysing the AHP

method which based on the questionary survey for Green Port specialists and port

officers

Follow the results of analysis on Green Port competitiveness AHP model

Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green ship certification system is

better for Green Port Construction welcome for shipping companies and citizens

who live around the port And in the analysis of Port competitiveness factors port

rates and charges always affects port competitiveness a lot As a trend inland

connection factor abstracts more attention of shipping companies

50

On the trend of port department each port should take a activity to adjust

strategy for improving its competitiveness Such as in the main ports evaluation

Busan port get a high value on port rates and charges and port facilities but as a

lower value on inland connection factor the final value is not as well as we look

forward In the evaluation of Singapore Port through it gets a lower value on rates

and charges higher value on inland connection and social circumstance causes the

final value are better So the Green Port Construction may be a trend in port

department

In the results of this thesis Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system are better solutions for Green Port Construction And

especially it can be verified that the port rates and charges always affects port

competitiveness Futhermore the investment for Green Port construction and its

effects have to be verified in the future

51

References

1 Hoyle B S and Smith J 1992 Transport and Development In Modern

transport geography edited by B S Hoyle R D Knowles (London Belhaven

Press)pp11-31

2 Beresford A K C De Souza A J R G and Pettit S J 2005 Stategic

development of liner shipping companies and terminal operators Ocean yearbook

19(Chicago 1L The University of Chicago Press) pp 732-750

3 Heaver T D 2002 Supply chain and logistics management implications for

liner shipping In The handbook of maritime economics and business edited by C

Grammenos (LondonLLP) pp 375-396

4 Park T E (2011) A Study on selection criteria of Green Port and evaluation of

major Korean port A masters thesis of graduate school of Incheon university

52

5 JeongBH (2009)Green port management policy directions in the green

growth era- The case of Gwangyang port in Republic of Korea Journal of Korea

Port Economic Association Vol25(3) p361-384

6 Lee J S Han N H(2009) A study on Green Port Revitalization According to

Air Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

7 Lee Y K Nan J W(2010)Green Logistics Policy Analysis and Implications

of Japan

8 Lee B S (2010)Tendency and Countermeasures on Green Logistics in Port

Logistics Company A masters thesis of graduate school of Korean Maritime

university

9 Lee J S (2009) A Study on Green Port Revitalization According to Air

Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

10 Zhang F Y Li Z Lu X J Yao X L(2008)Competitiveness of Inland

Ports Based on F-AHP

11 Port of Long Beach (2009) Green Port Policy wwwpolbcom

12 The port of Los Angeles wwwportoflosangelesorg

47

Table426 Final evaluation value on main ports Green Port measures and

competitiveness

Rotterdam

Port

Singapore

Port

LALB

Port

Shanghai

Port

Hongkong

Port

Busan

Port

Yocohama

Port

394 345 330 330 319 318 317

43 Results Analysis

From the results table we can obtain the many results as following

① The main Green Port measures which are more important to improve port

competitiveness are Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system the indicator weights are 01702 01506 and

01371 among the 11 indicators

② In the Green Port construction Cost on amount of CO2 emission and CO2

emissions reduction policies are the restrictions indicators but the weight

of two indicators are not big 00319 and 00196 So effect on Green Port

construction to port competitiveness does have the weaken capacity but

not clearly strengthen more clearly Thus Green Port construction really

could improve the port competitiveness

48

③ In the case study traditional ports Rotterdam and Singapore Port give us

better examples on Green Port construction especially Rotterdam Port

④ Hongkong Busan and Yocohama Port all got a lower evaluation value

But in detail Hongkong and Yocohama Port got a lower on the port

facilities and rates and charges Busan Port got a higher on the port

facilities and rates and charges but a lower on the inland connection and

social circumstance

⑤ Shanghai Port doesnrsquot have Particular strength factors but the

comprehensive strength is not bad the same as LALB Port

49

Chapter 5 Conclusion

In this thesis the effects of Green Port construction for improving the port

competitiveness have been studied Under the definition of Green Port the

characteristics of Green Port and its effects has been shown by analysing the AHP

method which based on the questionary survey for Green Port specialists and port

officers

Follow the results of analysis on Green Port competitiveness AHP model

Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green ship certification system is

better for Green Port Construction welcome for shipping companies and citizens

who live around the port And in the analysis of Port competitiveness factors port

rates and charges always affects port competitiveness a lot As a trend inland

connection factor abstracts more attention of shipping companies

50

On the trend of port department each port should take a activity to adjust

strategy for improving its competitiveness Such as in the main ports evaluation

Busan port get a high value on port rates and charges and port facilities but as a

lower value on inland connection factor the final value is not as well as we look

forward In the evaluation of Singapore Port through it gets a lower value on rates

and charges higher value on inland connection and social circumstance causes the

final value are better So the Green Port Construction may be a trend in port

department

In the results of this thesis Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system are better solutions for Green Port Construction And

especially it can be verified that the port rates and charges always affects port

competitiveness Futhermore the investment for Green Port construction and its

effects have to be verified in the future

51

References

1 Hoyle B S and Smith J 1992 Transport and Development In Modern

transport geography edited by B S Hoyle R D Knowles (London Belhaven

Press)pp11-31

2 Beresford A K C De Souza A J R G and Pettit S J 2005 Stategic

development of liner shipping companies and terminal operators Ocean yearbook

19(Chicago 1L The University of Chicago Press) pp 732-750

3 Heaver T D 2002 Supply chain and logistics management implications for

liner shipping In The handbook of maritime economics and business edited by C

Grammenos (LondonLLP) pp 375-396

4 Park T E (2011) A Study on selection criteria of Green Port and evaluation of

major Korean port A masters thesis of graduate school of Incheon university

52

5 JeongBH (2009)Green port management policy directions in the green

growth era- The case of Gwangyang port in Republic of Korea Journal of Korea

Port Economic Association Vol25(3) p361-384

6 Lee J S Han N H(2009) A study on Green Port Revitalization According to

Air Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

7 Lee Y K Nan J W(2010)Green Logistics Policy Analysis and Implications

of Japan

8 Lee B S (2010)Tendency and Countermeasures on Green Logistics in Port

Logistics Company A masters thesis of graduate school of Korean Maritime

university

9 Lee J S (2009) A Study on Green Port Revitalization According to Air

Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

10 Zhang F Y Li Z Lu X J Yao X L(2008)Competitiveness of Inland

Ports Based on F-AHP

11 Port of Long Beach (2009) Green Port Policy wwwpolbcom

12 The port of Los Angeles wwwportoflosangelesorg

48

③ In the case study traditional ports Rotterdam and Singapore Port give us

better examples on Green Port construction especially Rotterdam Port

④ Hongkong Busan and Yocohama Port all got a lower evaluation value

But in detail Hongkong and Yocohama Port got a lower on the port

facilities and rates and charges Busan Port got a higher on the port

facilities and rates and charges but a lower on the inland connection and

social circumstance

⑤ Shanghai Port doesnrsquot have Particular strength factors but the

comprehensive strength is not bad the same as LALB Port

49

Chapter 5 Conclusion

In this thesis the effects of Green Port construction for improving the port

competitiveness have been studied Under the definition of Green Port the

characteristics of Green Port and its effects has been shown by analysing the AHP

method which based on the questionary survey for Green Port specialists and port

officers

Follow the results of analysis on Green Port competitiveness AHP model

Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green ship certification system is

better for Green Port Construction welcome for shipping companies and citizens

who live around the port And in the analysis of Port competitiveness factors port

rates and charges always affects port competitiveness a lot As a trend inland

connection factor abstracts more attention of shipping companies

50

On the trend of port department each port should take a activity to adjust

strategy for improving its competitiveness Such as in the main ports evaluation

Busan port get a high value on port rates and charges and port facilities but as a

lower value on inland connection factor the final value is not as well as we look

forward In the evaluation of Singapore Port through it gets a lower value on rates

and charges higher value on inland connection and social circumstance causes the

final value are better So the Green Port Construction may be a trend in port

department

In the results of this thesis Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system are better solutions for Green Port Construction And

especially it can be verified that the port rates and charges always affects port

competitiveness Futhermore the investment for Green Port construction and its

effects have to be verified in the future

51

References

1 Hoyle B S and Smith J 1992 Transport and Development In Modern

transport geography edited by B S Hoyle R D Knowles (London Belhaven

Press)pp11-31

2 Beresford A K C De Souza A J R G and Pettit S J 2005 Stategic

development of liner shipping companies and terminal operators Ocean yearbook

19(Chicago 1L The University of Chicago Press) pp 732-750

3 Heaver T D 2002 Supply chain and logistics management implications for

liner shipping In The handbook of maritime economics and business edited by C

Grammenos (LondonLLP) pp 375-396

4 Park T E (2011) A Study on selection criteria of Green Port and evaluation of

major Korean port A masters thesis of graduate school of Incheon university

52

5 JeongBH (2009)Green port management policy directions in the green

growth era- The case of Gwangyang port in Republic of Korea Journal of Korea

Port Economic Association Vol25(3) p361-384

6 Lee J S Han N H(2009) A study on Green Port Revitalization According to

Air Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

7 Lee Y K Nan J W(2010)Green Logistics Policy Analysis and Implications

of Japan

8 Lee B S (2010)Tendency and Countermeasures on Green Logistics in Port

Logistics Company A masters thesis of graduate school of Korean Maritime

university

9 Lee J S (2009) A Study on Green Port Revitalization According to Air

Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

10 Zhang F Y Li Z Lu X J Yao X L(2008)Competitiveness of Inland

Ports Based on F-AHP

11 Port of Long Beach (2009) Green Port Policy wwwpolbcom

12 The port of Los Angeles wwwportoflosangelesorg

49

Chapter 5 Conclusion

In this thesis the effects of Green Port construction for improving the port

competitiveness have been studied Under the definition of Green Port the

characteristics of Green Port and its effects has been shown by analysing the AHP

method which based on the questionary survey for Green Port specialists and port

officers

Follow the results of analysis on Green Port competitiveness AHP model

Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green ship certification system is

better for Green Port Construction welcome for shipping companies and citizens

who live around the port And in the analysis of Port competitiveness factors port

rates and charges always affects port competitiveness a lot As a trend inland

connection factor abstracts more attention of shipping companies

50

On the trend of port department each port should take a activity to adjust

strategy for improving its competitiveness Such as in the main ports evaluation

Busan port get a high value on port rates and charges and port facilities but as a

lower value on inland connection factor the final value is not as well as we look

forward In the evaluation of Singapore Port through it gets a lower value on rates

and charges higher value on inland connection and social circumstance causes the

final value are better So the Green Port Construction may be a trend in port

department

In the results of this thesis Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system are better solutions for Green Port Construction And

especially it can be verified that the port rates and charges always affects port

competitiveness Futhermore the investment for Green Port construction and its

effects have to be verified in the future

51

References

1 Hoyle B S and Smith J 1992 Transport and Development In Modern

transport geography edited by B S Hoyle R D Knowles (London Belhaven

Press)pp11-31

2 Beresford A K C De Souza A J R G and Pettit S J 2005 Stategic

development of liner shipping companies and terminal operators Ocean yearbook

19(Chicago 1L The University of Chicago Press) pp 732-750

3 Heaver T D 2002 Supply chain and logistics management implications for

liner shipping In The handbook of maritime economics and business edited by C

Grammenos (LondonLLP) pp 375-396

4 Park T E (2011) A Study on selection criteria of Green Port and evaluation of

major Korean port A masters thesis of graduate school of Incheon university

52

5 JeongBH (2009)Green port management policy directions in the green

growth era- The case of Gwangyang port in Republic of Korea Journal of Korea

Port Economic Association Vol25(3) p361-384

6 Lee J S Han N H(2009) A study on Green Port Revitalization According to

Air Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

7 Lee Y K Nan J W(2010)Green Logistics Policy Analysis and Implications

of Japan

8 Lee B S (2010)Tendency and Countermeasures on Green Logistics in Port

Logistics Company A masters thesis of graduate school of Korean Maritime

university

9 Lee J S (2009) A Study on Green Port Revitalization According to Air

Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

10 Zhang F Y Li Z Lu X J Yao X L(2008)Competitiveness of Inland

Ports Based on F-AHP

11 Port of Long Beach (2009) Green Port Policy wwwpolbcom

12 The port of Los Angeles wwwportoflosangelesorg

50

On the trend of port department each port should take a activity to adjust

strategy for improving its competitiveness Such as in the main ports evaluation

Busan port get a high value on port rates and charges and port facilities but as a

lower value on inland connection factor the final value is not as well as we look

forward In the evaluation of Singapore Port through it gets a lower value on rates

and charges higher value on inland connection and social circumstance causes the

final value are better So the Green Port Construction may be a trend in port

department

In the results of this thesis Eco-friendly means of transport e-RTGC and Green

ship certification system are better solutions for Green Port Construction And

especially it can be verified that the port rates and charges always affects port

competitiveness Futhermore the investment for Green Port construction and its

effects have to be verified in the future

51

References

1 Hoyle B S and Smith J 1992 Transport and Development In Modern

transport geography edited by B S Hoyle R D Knowles (London Belhaven

Press)pp11-31

2 Beresford A K C De Souza A J R G and Pettit S J 2005 Stategic

development of liner shipping companies and terminal operators Ocean yearbook

19(Chicago 1L The University of Chicago Press) pp 732-750

3 Heaver T D 2002 Supply chain and logistics management implications for

liner shipping In The handbook of maritime economics and business edited by C

Grammenos (LondonLLP) pp 375-396

4 Park T E (2011) A Study on selection criteria of Green Port and evaluation of

major Korean port A masters thesis of graduate school of Incheon university

52

5 JeongBH (2009)Green port management policy directions in the green

growth era- The case of Gwangyang port in Republic of Korea Journal of Korea

Port Economic Association Vol25(3) p361-384

6 Lee J S Han N H(2009) A study on Green Port Revitalization According to

Air Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

7 Lee Y K Nan J W(2010)Green Logistics Policy Analysis and Implications

of Japan

8 Lee B S (2010)Tendency and Countermeasures on Green Logistics in Port

Logistics Company A masters thesis of graduate school of Korean Maritime

university

9 Lee J S (2009) A Study on Green Port Revitalization According to Air

Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

10 Zhang F Y Li Z Lu X J Yao X L(2008)Competitiveness of Inland

Ports Based on F-AHP

11 Port of Long Beach (2009) Green Port Policy wwwpolbcom

12 The port of Los Angeles wwwportoflosangelesorg

51

References

1 Hoyle B S and Smith J 1992 Transport and Development In Modern

transport geography edited by B S Hoyle R D Knowles (London Belhaven

Press)pp11-31

2 Beresford A K C De Souza A J R G and Pettit S J 2005 Stategic

development of liner shipping companies and terminal operators Ocean yearbook

19(Chicago 1L The University of Chicago Press) pp 732-750

3 Heaver T D 2002 Supply chain and logistics management implications for

liner shipping In The handbook of maritime economics and business edited by C

Grammenos (LondonLLP) pp 375-396

4 Park T E (2011) A Study on selection criteria of Green Port and evaluation of

major Korean port A masters thesis of graduate school of Incheon university

52

5 JeongBH (2009)Green port management policy directions in the green

growth era- The case of Gwangyang port in Republic of Korea Journal of Korea

Port Economic Association Vol25(3) p361-384

6 Lee J S Han N H(2009) A study on Green Port Revitalization According to

Air Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

7 Lee Y K Nan J W(2010)Green Logistics Policy Analysis and Implications

of Japan

8 Lee B S (2010)Tendency and Countermeasures on Green Logistics in Port

Logistics Company A masters thesis of graduate school of Korean Maritime

university

9 Lee J S (2009) A Study on Green Port Revitalization According to Air

Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

10 Zhang F Y Li Z Lu X J Yao X L(2008)Competitiveness of Inland

Ports Based on F-AHP

11 Port of Long Beach (2009) Green Port Policy wwwpolbcom

12 The port of Los Angeles wwwportoflosangelesorg

52

5 JeongBH (2009)Green port management policy directions in the green

growth era- The case of Gwangyang port in Republic of Korea Journal of Korea

Port Economic Association Vol25(3) p361-384

6 Lee J S Han N H(2009) A study on Green Port Revitalization According to

Air Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

7 Lee Y K Nan J W(2010)Green Logistics Policy Analysis and Implications

of Japan

8 Lee B S (2010)Tendency and Countermeasures on Green Logistics in Port

Logistics Company A masters thesis of graduate school of Korean Maritime

university

9 Lee J S (2009) A Study on Green Port Revitalization According to Air

Pollution and Climate Change Regulations

10 Zhang F Y Li Z Lu X J Yao X L(2008)Competitiveness of Inland

Ports Based on F-AHP

11 Port of Long Beach (2009) Green Port Policy wwwpolbcom

12 The port of Los Angeles wwwportoflosangelesorg

53

통계법 33조(비밀의 보호)에 의거 본 조사에서

개인의 비밀에 속하는 사항은 엄격히

보호됩니다

ID

「그린포트에 의한 항만경쟁력평가 모형구축」을 위한 조사

안녕하십니까

한국해양대학교 물류시스템학과 석사과정 Wang liru 입니다

본 연구는 AHP 기법을 활용하여 『그린포트에 의한 항만 경쟁력 평가』의

경쟁력 요소를 종합적으로 평가하여 평가 항목 간 상대적 중요도를 도출하여

그린포트가 항만 경쟁력에 영향을 얼마나 미치고 있는 지 알아보기 위한

연구입니다 여기에 일환으로 항만 경쟁력을 결정하는 요소에 대한 중요도를

도출하기 위한 설문 조사를 실행하고 있습니다

첫 번째 설문은 평가 요소 간 가중치를 선정하기 위한 설문과 각 요소에

포함되어 있는 지표들 간의 가중치를 선정하기 위한 설문으로 구성되어

있습니다

54

두 번째 설문은 항만 경쟁력 평가를 위한 의사결정에서 요소별로 항만의

경쟁력 정도를 살펴보기 위한 설문으로 구성되어 있습니다

설문의 내용 및 결과는 오직 연구 목적으로만 사용 될 것이며 귀하의 성의

있는 답변은 본 연구에 큰 도움이 될 것입니다

2011 년 5 월

지도 교수 김 환 성

(메일 kimhshhuackr 전화 051) 410 - 4334)

석사 과정 Wang liru

(메일 wangliruhhuackr 전화 051) 410 - 4914)

응답자 정보

소속기간명 소속기관 유형

작성자 소속부서(직위) 성명

연락처 전화번호 e-mail

소속기관 유형 민간기업 공기업 출연(연) 대학 정부 협회 및 공단 기타 중

택 1

사전 참조 내용

분석방법

- 계층적 분석법(AHP Analytic Hierarchy Process)은 평가에서 고려되는

평가항목들을 계층화한 다음 평가항목간 상대적 중요도를 측정하여 우선

시행해야 할 사업의 우선순위를 종합적으로 판단하는 의사결정 기법 중 하나임

설문 작성 예시

55

- 평가항목에 대한 판단을 쉽게 하기 위해서 쌍대비교방식을 사용하고 있으며

항만 경쟁력 요소 평가에서 항만 시설이 항만 서비스 보다 약간 중요 하다고

판단되면 다음 보기와 같이 표시함

middot 항만시설 e-RTGC AMP AGV

middot 항만비용 그린선박 인증제도 친환경기술 인센티브 속도감소 할인제도

middot 배후연계 친친환환경경운운송송수수단단의의 전전환환 공공동동수수배배송송

middot 사회여건 항항만만내내 친친수수공공간간 조조성성계계획획 CO2 배출량 비용 CCOO22 배배출출량량 감감축축 정정책책

추진분야

절

대

중

요

매

우

중

요

중

요

약

간

중

요

동

일

약

간

중

요

중

요

매

우

중

요

절

대

중

요

추진분야

항만시설 ⑨ ⑧ ⑦ ⑥ ⑤ ④ radic③ ② ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥ ⑦ ⑧ ⑨ 항만비용

그린포트에 의한 항만경쟁력 평가모델

56

경쟁력 요소 및 세부 내용

경경쟁쟁력력 요요소소 경경쟁쟁력력 요요소소의의 세세부부 설설명명

항만

시설

e-RTGC

야드내에서 일정한 통로를 이동하면서 컨테이너를

처리하는 RTGC 의 에너지원을 전기로 전환한 크레인으로

CO2 배출을 저감시킴

AMP

정박시 선박자체동력 사용에 의해 발생되는 배기가스

배출을 억제하기 위하여 육상에서 선박에 전기를 공급하는

시설을 AMP(Alternative Maritime Power)라고 함

AGV

항만 내의 이송수단을 기존의 야드트럭에서 AGV 로

교체하여 이송 에너지원을 디젤에서 전기로 교체하며 CO2

배출량을 감축시킴

항만

비용

그린선박

인증제도

선박건조 middot 선원고용 middot 선박부품 middot 선박관리 등에 있어 CO2

배출량을 줄이는 활동을 할 경우 해당선박에 대하여

그린선박 인증서를 부여하는 제도임 인증서를 부여받은

선박에 대하여 몇몇 항만들은(45 개 항만) 입항료 감면

예도선 middot 선용품 기업 이용료 감면등의 인센티브를

시행하고 있음

친환경기술

인센티브

친환경기술을 적용하는 선박에 대하여 접안료 및 입항료

면제 등의 인센티브를 제공하는 것

속도감소

할인제도

항만의 항계 내에서 선박의 운항속도를 줄임으로써 CO2

배출량을 절감 시킬수 있으므로 이에 대한 선박의 속도

저감에 대한 인센티브를 제공하는 제도

배후

연계

친환경

운송수단 전환

내륙운송에서 주로 트럭을 사용하고 있지만 철도

연안운송등 친환경 수송수단으로 전환하여 트럭에 의한

배기가스 배출을 억제함(모달쉬프트)

57

공동수배송

각 개별 화주가 수송하는 방식에서 화주 또는

트럭운송업자가 공동으로 통합 적재 수송하는 방식으로

전환하여 수송비 절감 차량의 적재효율의 향상 공차율의

감소 CO2 배출량 감소 등을 도모하는 시스템

사회

여건

항만내 친수공간

조성계획

항만의 수변공간을 활용한 수변공원 야외무대 파고라 및

벤치 등의 휴게시설과 거주민을 위한 커뮤니티공간의

조성을 행하고 관광객을 유치하는 등 각 항만의 지역적인

특색을 고려한 친수공간 조성계획

CO2

배출량 비용

각 국가별 및 산업별 CO2 배출량에 대한 환산 비용(예

배출권 거래제)

CO2 배출량

감축 정책

기후변화협약 및 교토의정서에 대한 각 국가들은 CO2

배출량 감축 정책 및 항만에서의 구체적인 추진 정책

그린포트에 의한 항만경쟁력 평가모델에 관한 설문 내용

1 현재 그린포트에 의한 항만경쟁력을 평가에서 항만시설 항만서비스 항만비용

입출항 요소 배후연계 사회여건에 대한 상대적인 중요도를 평가해 주시기 바랍니다

보기를 참조하여 아래 분항에 ldquoradic rdquo 표기하여 주시기 바랍니다 (반드시 한 칸에만

ldquoradicrdquo 표시하여 주시기 바랍니다)

평가속성

절

대

중

요

매

우

중

요

중

요

약

간

중

요

동

일

약

간

중

요

중

요

매

우

중

요

절

대

중

요

평가속성

항만시설 ⑨ ⑧ ⑦ ⑥ ⑤ ④ ③ ② ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥ ⑦ ⑧ ⑨ 항만비용

항만시설 ⑨ ⑧ ⑦ ⑥ ⑤ ④ ③ ② ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥ ⑦ ⑧ ⑨ 배후연계

항만시설 ⑨ ⑧ ⑦ ⑥ ⑤ ④ ③ ② ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥ ⑦ ⑧ ⑨ 사회여건

항만비용 ⑨ ⑧ ⑦ ⑥ ⑤ ④ ③ ② ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥ ⑦ ⑧ ⑨ 배후연계

항만비용 ⑨ ⑧ ⑦ ⑥ ⑤ ④ ③ ② ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥ ⑦ ⑧ ⑨ 사회여건

58

배후연계 ⑨ ⑧ ⑦ ⑥ ⑤ ④ ③ ② ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥ ⑦ ⑧ ⑨ 사회여건

2 항만시설에 관한 세부요소인 e-RTGC AMP AGV 중 어느 항목이 상대적으로 더

중요한지 평가해 주시기 바랍니다 보기를 참조하여 아래 분항에 ldquoradic rdquo 표기하여

주시기 바랍니다 (반드시 한 칸에만 ldquoradicrdquo 표시하여 주시기 바랍니다)

평가속성

절

대

중

요

매

우

중

요

중

요

약

간

중

요

동

일

약

간

중

요

중

요

매

우

중

요

절

대

중

요

평가속성

e-RTGC ⑨ ⑧ ⑦ ⑥ ⑤ ④ ③ ② ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥ ⑦ ⑧ ⑨ AMP

e-RTGC ⑨ ⑧ ⑦ ⑥ ⑤ ④ ③ ② ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥ ⑦ ⑧ ⑨ AGV

AMP ⑨ ⑧ ⑦ ⑥ ⑤ ④ ③ ② ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥ ⑦ ⑧ ⑨ AGV

3 항만비용에 관한 세부요소인 그린선박 인증제도 친환경기술 인센티브

속도감소할인제도 중 어느 항목이 상대적으로 더 중요한지 평가해 주시기

바랍니다보기를 참조하여 아래 분항에 ldquoradic rdquo 표기하여 주시기 바랍니다 (반드시 한

칸에만 ldquoradicrdquo 표시하여 주시기 바랍니다)

평가속성

절

대

중

요

매

우

중

요

중

요

약

간

중

요

동

일

약

간

중

요

중

요

매

우

중

요

절

대

중

요

평가속성

그린선박

인증제도 ⑨ ⑧ ⑦ ⑥ ⑤ ④ ③ ② ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥ ⑦ ⑧ ⑨

친환경기술

인센티브

그린선박

인증제도

속도감소

할인제도

친환경기술

인센티브

속도감소

할인제도

59

4 배후연계에 관한 세부요소인 친환경 운송수단 전환 공동수배송 중 어느

항목이 상대적으로 더 중요한지 평가해 주시기 바랍니다보기를 참조하여 아래

분항에 ldquoradic rdquo 표기하여 주시기 바랍니다 (반드시 한 칸에만 ldquoradicrdquo

표시하여 주시기 바랍니다)

평가속성

절

대

중

요

매

우

중

요

중

요

약

간

중

요

동

일

약

간

중

요

중

요

매

우

중

요

절

대

중

요

평가속성

친환경

운송수단

전환

⑨ ⑧ ⑦ ⑥ ⑤ ④ ③ ② ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥ ⑦ ⑧ ⑨ 공동수배송

5 사회여건에 관한 세부요소인 항만내 친수공간 조성계획 CO2 배출량 비용 CO2

배출량 감축 정책 중 어느 항목이 상대적으로 더 중요한지 평가해 주시기

바랍니다보기를 참조하여 아래 분항에 ldquoradic rdquo 표기하여 주시기 바랍니다 (반드시 한

칸에만 ldquoradicrdquo 표시하여 주시기 바랍니다)

평가속성

절

대

중

요

매

우

중

요

중

요

약

간

중

요

동

일

약

간

중

요

중

요

매

우

중

요

절

대

중

요

평가속성

항항만만내내

친친수수공공간간

조조성성계계획획

⑨ ⑧ ⑦ ⑥ ⑤ ④ ③ ② ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥ ⑦ ⑧ ⑨

CO2 배출량

비용

항항만만내내

친친수수공공간간

조조성성계계획획

CO2 배출량

감축 정책

CO2 배출량

비용

CO2 배출량

감축 정책

60

6 현시점에서의 그린포트 구축 상황을 고려하여 그린포트에 의한 항만의 경쟁력

요소에 따라 각 항만 갂의 경쟁력을 평가해 주시기 바랍니다 (해당 항만에 대하여

느껴지시는 정도에 따라서 해당하는 점수(5-1 사이)를 ( )안에 매겨 주시면 됩니다)

예

시

매우 좋다 좋다 보통 이다 안좋다 매우

안좋다

⑤

④

③

②

①

싱가포르 상하이 홍콩 부산 LALB 로테르담 요코하마

항만

시설 ( 4 ) ( 4 ) ( 3 ) ( 4 ) ( 3 ) ( 5 ) ( 5 )

평가속성 싱가포르 상하이 홍콩 부산 LALB 로테르담 요코하마

항만시설 ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

항만비용 ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

배후연계 ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

사회여건 ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

감사드립니다

• Chapter 1 Introduction
• • 11 Research background and objective
  • 12 Scope and structure of research
  • • Chapter 2 Green Port Construction Situation
    • • 21 Green Port Construction Background
      • 22 The Definition of Green Port
      • 23 Green Port Construction Situation in major countries
      • 24 Green Port Indicators Research
      • • Chapter 3 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and
        • • 31 Port Competitiveness Literature Review
          • 32 Port Competitiveness Development Tree
          • 33 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green
          • • Chapter 4 The Green Port Competitiveness Analysis
            • • 41 The Green Port Competitiveness Model by AHP
              • 42 Green Port Competitiveness Analysis
              • 43 Results Analysis
              • • Chapter 5 Conclusion
                • References

                • ltstartpagegt13Chapter 1 Introduction 1 11 Research background and objective 1 12 Scope and structure of research 3Chapter 2 Green Port Construction Situation 6 21 Green Port Construction Background 6 22 The Definition of Green Port 9 23 Green Port Construction Situation in major countries 12 24 Green Port Indicators Research 22Chapter 3 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and 24 31 Port Competitiveness Literature Review 24 32 Port Competitiveness Development Tree 30 33 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green 32Chapter 4 The Green Port Competitiveness Analysis 36 41 The Green Port Competitiveness Model by AHP 36 42 Green Port Competitiveness Analysis 38 43 Results Analysis 47Chapter 5 Conclusion 49References 51ltbodygt

54

두 번째 설문은 항만 경쟁력 평가를 위한 의사결정에서 요소별로 항만의

경쟁력 정도를 살펴보기 위한 설문으로 구성되어 있습니다

설문의 내용 및 결과는 오직 연구 목적으로만 사용 될 것이며 귀하의 성의

있는 답변은 본 연구에 큰 도움이 될 것입니다

2011 년 5 월

지도 교수 김 환 성

(메일 kimhshhuackr 전화 051) 410 - 4334)

석사 과정 Wang liru

(메일 wangliruhhuackr 전화 051) 410 - 4914)

응답자 정보

소속기간명 소속기관 유형

작성자 소속부서(직위) 성명

연락처 전화번호 e-mail

소속기관 유형 민간기업 공기업 출연(연) 대학 정부 협회 및 공단 기타 중

택 1

사전 참조 내용

분석방법

- 계층적 분석법(AHP Analytic Hierarchy Process)은 평가에서 고려되는

평가항목들을 계층화한 다음 평가항목간 상대적 중요도를 측정하여 우선

시행해야 할 사업의 우선순위를 종합적으로 판단하는 의사결정 기법 중 하나임

설문 작성 예시

55

- 평가항목에 대한 판단을 쉽게 하기 위해서 쌍대비교방식을 사용하고 있으며

항만 경쟁력 요소 평가에서 항만 시설이 항만 서비스 보다 약간 중요 하다고

판단되면 다음 보기와 같이 표시함

middot 항만시설 e-RTGC AMP AGV

middot 항만비용 그린선박 인증제도 친환경기술 인센티브 속도감소 할인제도

middot 배후연계 친친환환경경운운송송수수단단의의 전전환환 공공동동수수배배송송

middot 사회여건 항항만만내내 친친수수공공간간 조조성성계계획획 CO2 배출량 비용 CCOO22 배배출출량량 감감축축 정정책책

추진분야

절

대

중

요

매

우

중

요

중

요

약

간

중

요

동

일

약

간

중

요

중

요

매

우

중

요

절

대

중

요

추진분야

항만시설 ⑨ ⑧ ⑦ ⑥ ⑤ ④ radic③ ② ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥ ⑦ ⑧ ⑨ 항만비용

그린포트에 의한 항만경쟁력 평가모델

56

경쟁력 요소 및 세부 내용

경경쟁쟁력력 요요소소 경경쟁쟁력력 요요소소의의 세세부부 설설명명

항만

시설

e-RTGC

야드내에서 일정한 통로를 이동하면서 컨테이너를

처리하는 RTGC 의 에너지원을 전기로 전환한 크레인으로

CO2 배출을 저감시킴

AMP

정박시 선박자체동력 사용에 의해 발생되는 배기가스

배출을 억제하기 위하여 육상에서 선박에 전기를 공급하는

시설을 AMP(Alternative Maritime Power)라고 함

AGV

항만 내의 이송수단을 기존의 야드트럭에서 AGV 로

교체하여 이송 에너지원을 디젤에서 전기로 교체하며 CO2

배출량을 감축시킴

항만

비용

그린선박

인증제도

선박건조 middot 선원고용 middot 선박부품 middot 선박관리 등에 있어 CO2

배출량을 줄이는 활동을 할 경우 해당선박에 대하여

그린선박 인증서를 부여하는 제도임 인증서를 부여받은

선박에 대하여 몇몇 항만들은(45 개 항만) 입항료 감면

예도선 middot 선용품 기업 이용료 감면등의 인센티브를

시행하고 있음

친환경기술

인센티브

친환경기술을 적용하는 선박에 대하여 접안료 및 입항료

면제 등의 인센티브를 제공하는 것

속도감소

할인제도

항만의 항계 내에서 선박의 운항속도를 줄임으로써 CO2

배출량을 절감 시킬수 있으므로 이에 대한 선박의 속도

저감에 대한 인센티브를 제공하는 제도

배후

연계

친환경

운송수단 전환

내륙운송에서 주로 트럭을 사용하고 있지만 철도

연안운송등 친환경 수송수단으로 전환하여 트럭에 의한

배기가스 배출을 억제함(모달쉬프트)

57

공동수배송

각 개별 화주가 수송하는 방식에서 화주 또는

트럭운송업자가 공동으로 통합 적재 수송하는 방식으로

전환하여 수송비 절감 차량의 적재효율의 향상 공차율의

감소 CO2 배출량 감소 등을 도모하는 시스템

사회

여건

항만내 친수공간

조성계획

항만의 수변공간을 활용한 수변공원 야외무대 파고라 및

벤치 등의 휴게시설과 거주민을 위한 커뮤니티공간의

조성을 행하고 관광객을 유치하는 등 각 항만의 지역적인

특색을 고려한 친수공간 조성계획

CO2

배출량 비용

각 국가별 및 산업별 CO2 배출량에 대한 환산 비용(예

배출권 거래제)

CO2 배출량

감축 정책

기후변화협약 및 교토의정서에 대한 각 국가들은 CO2

배출량 감축 정책 및 항만에서의 구체적인 추진 정책

그린포트에 의한 항만경쟁력 평가모델에 관한 설문 내용

1 현재 그린포트에 의한 항만경쟁력을 평가에서 항만시설 항만서비스 항만비용

입출항 요소 배후연계 사회여건에 대한 상대적인 중요도를 평가해 주시기 바랍니다

보기를 참조하여 아래 분항에 ldquoradic rdquo 표기하여 주시기 바랍니다 (반드시 한 칸에만

ldquoradicrdquo 표시하여 주시기 바랍니다)

평가속성

절

대

중

요

매

우

중

요

중

요

약

간

중

요

동

일

약

간

중

요

중

요

매

우

중

요

절

대

중

요

평가속성

항만시설 ⑨ ⑧ ⑦ ⑥ ⑤ ④ ③ ② ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥ ⑦ ⑧ ⑨ 항만비용

항만시설 ⑨ ⑧ ⑦ ⑥ ⑤ ④ ③ ② ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥ ⑦ ⑧ ⑨ 배후연계

항만시설 ⑨ ⑧ ⑦ ⑥ ⑤ ④ ③ ② ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥ ⑦ ⑧ ⑨ 사회여건

항만비용 ⑨ ⑧ ⑦ ⑥ ⑤ ④ ③ ② ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥ ⑦ ⑧ ⑨ 배후연계

항만비용 ⑨ ⑧ ⑦ ⑥ ⑤ ④ ③ ② ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥ ⑦ ⑧ ⑨ 사회여건

58

배후연계 ⑨ ⑧ ⑦ ⑥ ⑤ ④ ③ ② ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥ ⑦ ⑧ ⑨ 사회여건

2 항만시설에 관한 세부요소인 e-RTGC AMP AGV 중 어느 항목이 상대적으로 더

중요한지 평가해 주시기 바랍니다 보기를 참조하여 아래 분항에 ldquoradic rdquo 표기하여

주시기 바랍니다 (반드시 한 칸에만 ldquoradicrdquo 표시하여 주시기 바랍니다)

평가속성

절

대

중

요

매

우

중

요

중

요

약

간

중

요

동

일

약

간

중

요

중

요

매

우

중

요

절

대

중

요

평가속성

e-RTGC ⑨ ⑧ ⑦ ⑥ ⑤ ④ ③ ② ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥ ⑦ ⑧ ⑨ AMP

e-RTGC ⑨ ⑧ ⑦ ⑥ ⑤ ④ ③ ② ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥ ⑦ ⑧ ⑨ AGV

AMP ⑨ ⑧ ⑦ ⑥ ⑤ ④ ③ ② ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥ ⑦ ⑧ ⑨ AGV

3 항만비용에 관한 세부요소인 그린선박 인증제도 친환경기술 인센티브

속도감소할인제도 중 어느 항목이 상대적으로 더 중요한지 평가해 주시기

바랍니다보기를 참조하여 아래 분항에 ldquoradic rdquo 표기하여 주시기 바랍니다 (반드시 한

칸에만 ldquoradicrdquo 표시하여 주시기 바랍니다)

평가속성

절

대

중

요

매

우

중

요

중

요

약

간

중

요

동

일

약

간

중

요

중

요

매

우

중

요

절

대

중

요

평가속성

그린선박

인증제도 ⑨ ⑧ ⑦ ⑥ ⑤ ④ ③ ② ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥ ⑦ ⑧ ⑨

친환경기술

인센티브

그린선박

인증제도

속도감소

할인제도

친환경기술

인센티브

속도감소

할인제도

59

4 배후연계에 관한 세부요소인 친환경 운송수단 전환 공동수배송 중 어느

항목이 상대적으로 더 중요한지 평가해 주시기 바랍니다보기를 참조하여 아래

분항에 ldquoradic rdquo 표기하여 주시기 바랍니다 (반드시 한 칸에만 ldquoradicrdquo

표시하여 주시기 바랍니다)

평가속성

절

대

중

요

매

우

중

요

중

요

약

간

중

요

동

일

약

간

중

요

중

요

매

우

중

요

절

대

중

요

평가속성

친환경

운송수단

전환

⑨ ⑧ ⑦ ⑥ ⑤ ④ ③ ② ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥ ⑦ ⑧ ⑨ 공동수배송

5 사회여건에 관한 세부요소인 항만내 친수공간 조성계획 CO2 배출량 비용 CO2

배출량 감축 정책 중 어느 항목이 상대적으로 더 중요한지 평가해 주시기

바랍니다보기를 참조하여 아래 분항에 ldquoradic rdquo 표기하여 주시기 바랍니다 (반드시 한

칸에만 ldquoradicrdquo 표시하여 주시기 바랍니다)

평가속성

절

대

중

요

매

우

중

요

중

요

약

간

중

요

동

일

약

간

중

요

중

요

매

우

중

요

절

대

중

요

평가속성

항항만만내내

친친수수공공간간

조조성성계계획획

⑨ ⑧ ⑦ ⑥ ⑤ ④ ③ ② ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥ ⑦ ⑧ ⑨

CO2 배출량

비용

항항만만내내

친친수수공공간간

조조성성계계획획

CO2 배출량

감축 정책

CO2 배출량

비용

CO2 배출량

감축 정책

60

6 현시점에서의 그린포트 구축 상황을 고려하여 그린포트에 의한 항만의 경쟁력

요소에 따라 각 항만 갂의 경쟁력을 평가해 주시기 바랍니다 (해당 항만에 대하여

느껴지시는 정도에 따라서 해당하는 점수(5-1 사이)를 ( )안에 매겨 주시면 됩니다)

예

시

매우 좋다 좋다 보통 이다 안좋다 매우

안좋다

⑤

④

③

②

①

싱가포르 상하이 홍콩 부산 LALB 로테르담 요코하마

항만

시설 ( 4 ) ( 4 ) ( 3 ) ( 4 ) ( 3 ) ( 5 ) ( 5 )

평가속성 싱가포르 상하이 홍콩 부산 LALB 로테르담 요코하마

항만시설 ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

항만비용 ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

배후연계 ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

사회여건 ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

감사드립니다

• Chapter 1 Introduction
• • 11 Research background and objective
  • 12 Scope and structure of research
  • • Chapter 2 Green Port Construction Situation
    • • 21 Green Port Construction Background
      • 22 The Definition of Green Port
      • 23 Green Port Construction Situation in major countries
      • 24 Green Port Indicators Research
      • • Chapter 3 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and
        • • 31 Port Competitiveness Literature Review
          • 32 Port Competitiveness Development Tree
          • 33 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green
          • • Chapter 4 The Green Port Competitiveness Analysis
            • • 41 The Green Port Competitiveness Model by AHP
              • 42 Green Port Competitiveness Analysis
              • 43 Results Analysis
              • • Chapter 5 Conclusion
                • References

                • ltstartpagegt13Chapter 1 Introduction 1 11 Research background and objective 1 12 Scope and structure of research 3Chapter 2 Green Port Construction Situation 6 21 Green Port Construction Background 6 22 The Definition of Green Port 9 23 Green Port Construction Situation in major countries 12 24 Green Port Indicators Research 22Chapter 3 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and 24 31 Port Competitiveness Literature Review 24 32 Port Competitiveness Development Tree 30 33 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green 32Chapter 4 The Green Port Competitiveness Analysis 36 41 The Green Port Competitiveness Model by AHP 36 42 Green Port Competitiveness Analysis 38 43 Results Analysis 47Chapter 5 Conclusion 49References 51ltbodygt

55

- 평가항목에 대한 판단을 쉽게 하기 위해서 쌍대비교방식을 사용하고 있으며

항만 경쟁력 요소 평가에서 항만 시설이 항만 서비스 보다 약간 중요 하다고

판단되면 다음 보기와 같이 표시함

middot 항만시설 e-RTGC AMP AGV

middot 항만비용 그린선박 인증제도 친환경기술 인센티브 속도감소 할인제도

middot 배후연계 친친환환경경운운송송수수단단의의 전전환환 공공동동수수배배송송

middot 사회여건 항항만만내내 친친수수공공간간 조조성성계계획획 CO2 배출량 비용 CCOO22 배배출출량량 감감축축 정정책책

추진분야

절

대

중

요

매

우

중

요

중

요

약

간

중

요

동

일

약

간

중

요

중

요

매

우

중

요

절

대

중

요

추진분야

항만시설 ⑨ ⑧ ⑦ ⑥ ⑤ ④ radic③ ② ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥ ⑦ ⑧ ⑨ 항만비용

그린포트에 의한 항만경쟁력 평가모델

56

경쟁력 요소 및 세부 내용

경경쟁쟁력력 요요소소 경경쟁쟁력력 요요소소의의 세세부부 설설명명

항만

시설

e-RTGC

야드내에서 일정한 통로를 이동하면서 컨테이너를

처리하는 RTGC 의 에너지원을 전기로 전환한 크레인으로

CO2 배출을 저감시킴

AMP

정박시 선박자체동력 사용에 의해 발생되는 배기가스

배출을 억제하기 위하여 육상에서 선박에 전기를 공급하는

시설을 AMP(Alternative Maritime Power)라고 함

AGV

항만 내의 이송수단을 기존의 야드트럭에서 AGV 로

교체하여 이송 에너지원을 디젤에서 전기로 교체하며 CO2

배출량을 감축시킴

항만

비용

그린선박

인증제도

선박건조 middot 선원고용 middot 선박부품 middot 선박관리 등에 있어 CO2

배출량을 줄이는 활동을 할 경우 해당선박에 대하여

그린선박 인증서를 부여하는 제도임 인증서를 부여받은

선박에 대하여 몇몇 항만들은(45 개 항만) 입항료 감면

예도선 middot 선용품 기업 이용료 감면등의 인센티브를

시행하고 있음

친환경기술

인센티브

친환경기술을 적용하는 선박에 대하여 접안료 및 입항료

면제 등의 인센티브를 제공하는 것

속도감소

할인제도

항만의 항계 내에서 선박의 운항속도를 줄임으로써 CO2

배출량을 절감 시킬수 있으므로 이에 대한 선박의 속도

저감에 대한 인센티브를 제공하는 제도

배후

연계

친환경

운송수단 전환

내륙운송에서 주로 트럭을 사용하고 있지만 철도

연안운송등 친환경 수송수단으로 전환하여 트럭에 의한

배기가스 배출을 억제함(모달쉬프트)

57

공동수배송

각 개별 화주가 수송하는 방식에서 화주 또는

트럭운송업자가 공동으로 통합 적재 수송하는 방식으로

전환하여 수송비 절감 차량의 적재효율의 향상 공차율의

감소 CO2 배출량 감소 등을 도모하는 시스템

사회

여건

항만내 친수공간

조성계획

항만의 수변공간을 활용한 수변공원 야외무대 파고라 및

벤치 등의 휴게시설과 거주민을 위한 커뮤니티공간의

조성을 행하고 관광객을 유치하는 등 각 항만의 지역적인

특색을 고려한 친수공간 조성계획

CO2

배출량 비용

각 국가별 및 산업별 CO2 배출량에 대한 환산 비용(예

배출권 거래제)

CO2 배출량

감축 정책

기후변화협약 및 교토의정서에 대한 각 국가들은 CO2

배출량 감축 정책 및 항만에서의 구체적인 추진 정책

그린포트에 의한 항만경쟁력 평가모델에 관한 설문 내용

1 현재 그린포트에 의한 항만경쟁력을 평가에서 항만시설 항만서비스 항만비용

입출항 요소 배후연계 사회여건에 대한 상대적인 중요도를 평가해 주시기 바랍니다

보기를 참조하여 아래 분항에 ldquoradic rdquo 표기하여 주시기 바랍니다 (반드시 한 칸에만

ldquoradicrdquo 표시하여 주시기 바랍니다)

평가속성

절

대

중

요

매

우

중

요

중

요

약

간

중

요

동

일

약

간

중

요

중

요

매

우

중

요

절

대

중

요

평가속성

항만시설 ⑨ ⑧ ⑦ ⑥ ⑤ ④ ③ ② ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥ ⑦ ⑧ ⑨ 항만비용

항만시설 ⑨ ⑧ ⑦ ⑥ ⑤ ④ ③ ② ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥ ⑦ ⑧ ⑨ 배후연계

항만시설 ⑨ ⑧ ⑦ ⑥ ⑤ ④ ③ ② ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥ ⑦ ⑧ ⑨ 사회여건

항만비용 ⑨ ⑧ ⑦ ⑥ ⑤ ④ ③ ② ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥ ⑦ ⑧ ⑨ 배후연계

항만비용 ⑨ ⑧ ⑦ ⑥ ⑤ ④ ③ ② ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥ ⑦ ⑧ ⑨ 사회여건

58

배후연계 ⑨ ⑧ ⑦ ⑥ ⑤ ④ ③ ② ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥ ⑦ ⑧ ⑨ 사회여건

2 항만시설에 관한 세부요소인 e-RTGC AMP AGV 중 어느 항목이 상대적으로 더

중요한지 평가해 주시기 바랍니다 보기를 참조하여 아래 분항에 ldquoradic rdquo 표기하여

주시기 바랍니다 (반드시 한 칸에만 ldquoradicrdquo 표시하여 주시기 바랍니다)

평가속성

절

대

중

요

매

우

중

요

중

요

약

간

중

요

동

일

약

간

중

요

중

요

매

우

중

요

절

대

중

요

평가속성

e-RTGC ⑨ ⑧ ⑦ ⑥ ⑤ ④ ③ ② ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥ ⑦ ⑧ ⑨ AMP

e-RTGC ⑨ ⑧ ⑦ ⑥ ⑤ ④ ③ ② ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥ ⑦ ⑧ ⑨ AGV

AMP ⑨ ⑧ ⑦ ⑥ ⑤ ④ ③ ② ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥ ⑦ ⑧ ⑨ AGV

3 항만비용에 관한 세부요소인 그린선박 인증제도 친환경기술 인센티브

속도감소할인제도 중 어느 항목이 상대적으로 더 중요한지 평가해 주시기

바랍니다보기를 참조하여 아래 분항에 ldquoradic rdquo 표기하여 주시기 바랍니다 (반드시 한

칸에만 ldquoradicrdquo 표시하여 주시기 바랍니다)

평가속성

절

대

중

요

매

우

중

요

중

요

약

간

중

요

동

일

약

간

중

요

중

요

매

우

중

요

절

대

중

요

평가속성

그린선박

인증제도 ⑨ ⑧ ⑦ ⑥ ⑤ ④ ③ ② ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥ ⑦ ⑧ ⑨

친환경기술

인센티브

그린선박

인증제도

속도감소

할인제도

친환경기술

인센티브

속도감소

할인제도

59

4 배후연계에 관한 세부요소인 친환경 운송수단 전환 공동수배송 중 어느

항목이 상대적으로 더 중요한지 평가해 주시기 바랍니다보기를 참조하여 아래

분항에 ldquoradic rdquo 표기하여 주시기 바랍니다 (반드시 한 칸에만 ldquoradicrdquo

표시하여 주시기 바랍니다)

평가속성

절

대

중

요

매

우

중

요

중

요

약

간

중

요

동

일

약

간

중

요

중

요

매

우

중

요

절

대

중

요

평가속성

친환경

운송수단

전환

⑨ ⑧ ⑦ ⑥ ⑤ ④ ③ ② ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥ ⑦ ⑧ ⑨ 공동수배송

5 사회여건에 관한 세부요소인 항만내 친수공간 조성계획 CO2 배출량 비용 CO2

배출량 감축 정책 중 어느 항목이 상대적으로 더 중요한지 평가해 주시기

바랍니다보기를 참조하여 아래 분항에 ldquoradic rdquo 표기하여 주시기 바랍니다 (반드시 한

칸에만 ldquoradicrdquo 표시하여 주시기 바랍니다)

평가속성

절

대

중

요

매

우

중

요

중

요

약

간

중

요

동

일

약

간

중

요

중

요

매

우

중

요

절

대

중

요

평가속성

항항만만내내

친친수수공공간간

조조성성계계획획

⑨ ⑧ ⑦ ⑥ ⑤ ④ ③ ② ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥ ⑦ ⑧ ⑨

CO2 배출량

비용

항항만만내내

친친수수공공간간

조조성성계계획획

CO2 배출량

감축 정책

CO2 배출량

비용

CO2 배출량

감축 정책

60

6 현시점에서의 그린포트 구축 상황을 고려하여 그린포트에 의한 항만의 경쟁력

요소에 따라 각 항만 갂의 경쟁력을 평가해 주시기 바랍니다 (해당 항만에 대하여

느껴지시는 정도에 따라서 해당하는 점수(5-1 사이)를 ( )안에 매겨 주시면 됩니다)

예

시

매우 좋다 좋다 보통 이다 안좋다 매우

안좋다

⑤

④

③

②

①

싱가포르 상하이 홍콩 부산 LALB 로테르담 요코하마

항만

시설 ( 4 ) ( 4 ) ( 3 ) ( 4 ) ( 3 ) ( 5 ) ( 5 )

평가속성 싱가포르 상하이 홍콩 부산 LALB 로테르담 요코하마

항만시설 ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

항만비용 ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

배후연계 ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

사회여건 ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

감사드립니다

• Chapter 1 Introduction
• • 11 Research background and objective
  • 12 Scope and structure of research
  • • Chapter 2 Green Port Construction Situation
    • • 21 Green Port Construction Background
      • 22 The Definition of Green Port
      • 23 Green Port Construction Situation in major countries
      • 24 Green Port Indicators Research
      • • Chapter 3 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and
        • • 31 Port Competitiveness Literature Review
          • 32 Port Competitiveness Development Tree
          • 33 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green
          • • Chapter 4 The Green Port Competitiveness Analysis
            • • 41 The Green Port Competitiveness Model by AHP
              • 42 Green Port Competitiveness Analysis
              • 43 Results Analysis
              • • Chapter 5 Conclusion
                • References

                • ltstartpagegt13Chapter 1 Introduction 1 11 Research background and objective 1 12 Scope and structure of research 3Chapter 2 Green Port Construction Situation 6 21 Green Port Construction Background 6 22 The Definition of Green Port 9 23 Green Port Construction Situation in major countries 12 24 Green Port Indicators Research 22Chapter 3 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and 24 31 Port Competitiveness Literature Review 24 32 Port Competitiveness Development Tree 30 33 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green 32Chapter 4 The Green Port Competitiveness Analysis 36 41 The Green Port Competitiveness Model by AHP 36 42 Green Port Competitiveness Analysis 38 43 Results Analysis 47Chapter 5 Conclusion 49References 51ltbodygt

56

경쟁력 요소 및 세부 내용

경경쟁쟁력력 요요소소 경경쟁쟁력력 요요소소의의 세세부부 설설명명

항만

시설

e-RTGC

야드내에서 일정한 통로를 이동하면서 컨테이너를

처리하는 RTGC 의 에너지원을 전기로 전환한 크레인으로

CO2 배출을 저감시킴

AMP

정박시 선박자체동력 사용에 의해 발생되는 배기가스

배출을 억제하기 위하여 육상에서 선박에 전기를 공급하는

시설을 AMP(Alternative Maritime Power)라고 함

AGV

항만 내의 이송수단을 기존의 야드트럭에서 AGV 로

교체하여 이송 에너지원을 디젤에서 전기로 교체하며 CO2

배출량을 감축시킴

항만

비용

그린선박

인증제도

선박건조 middot 선원고용 middot 선박부품 middot 선박관리 등에 있어 CO2

배출량을 줄이는 활동을 할 경우 해당선박에 대하여

그린선박 인증서를 부여하는 제도임 인증서를 부여받은

선박에 대하여 몇몇 항만들은(45 개 항만) 입항료 감면

예도선 middot 선용품 기업 이용료 감면등의 인센티브를

시행하고 있음

친환경기술

인센티브

친환경기술을 적용하는 선박에 대하여 접안료 및 입항료

면제 등의 인센티브를 제공하는 것

속도감소

할인제도

항만의 항계 내에서 선박의 운항속도를 줄임으로써 CO2

배출량을 절감 시킬수 있으므로 이에 대한 선박의 속도

저감에 대한 인센티브를 제공하는 제도

배후

연계

친환경

운송수단 전환

내륙운송에서 주로 트럭을 사용하고 있지만 철도

연안운송등 친환경 수송수단으로 전환하여 트럭에 의한

배기가스 배출을 억제함(모달쉬프트)

57

공동수배송

각 개별 화주가 수송하는 방식에서 화주 또는

트럭운송업자가 공동으로 통합 적재 수송하는 방식으로

전환하여 수송비 절감 차량의 적재효율의 향상 공차율의

감소 CO2 배출량 감소 등을 도모하는 시스템

사회

여건

항만내 친수공간

조성계획

항만의 수변공간을 활용한 수변공원 야외무대 파고라 및

벤치 등의 휴게시설과 거주민을 위한 커뮤니티공간의

조성을 행하고 관광객을 유치하는 등 각 항만의 지역적인

특색을 고려한 친수공간 조성계획

CO2

배출량 비용

각 국가별 및 산업별 CO2 배출량에 대한 환산 비용(예

배출권 거래제)

CO2 배출량

감축 정책

기후변화협약 및 교토의정서에 대한 각 국가들은 CO2

배출량 감축 정책 및 항만에서의 구체적인 추진 정책

그린포트에 의한 항만경쟁력 평가모델에 관한 설문 내용

1 현재 그린포트에 의한 항만경쟁력을 평가에서 항만시설 항만서비스 항만비용

입출항 요소 배후연계 사회여건에 대한 상대적인 중요도를 평가해 주시기 바랍니다

보기를 참조하여 아래 분항에 ldquoradic rdquo 표기하여 주시기 바랍니다 (반드시 한 칸에만

ldquoradicrdquo 표시하여 주시기 바랍니다)

평가속성

절

대

중

요

매

우

중

요

중

요

약

간

중

요

동

일

약

간

중

요

중

요

매

우

중

요

절

대

중

요

평가속성

항만시설 ⑨ ⑧ ⑦ ⑥ ⑤ ④ ③ ② ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥ ⑦ ⑧ ⑨ 항만비용

항만시설 ⑨ ⑧ ⑦ ⑥ ⑤ ④ ③ ② ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥ ⑦ ⑧ ⑨ 배후연계

항만시설 ⑨ ⑧ ⑦ ⑥ ⑤ ④ ③ ② ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥ ⑦ ⑧ ⑨ 사회여건

항만비용 ⑨ ⑧ ⑦ ⑥ ⑤ ④ ③ ② ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥ ⑦ ⑧ ⑨ 배후연계

항만비용 ⑨ ⑧ ⑦ ⑥ ⑤ ④ ③ ② ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥ ⑦ ⑧ ⑨ 사회여건

58

배후연계 ⑨ ⑧ ⑦ ⑥ ⑤ ④ ③ ② ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥ ⑦ ⑧ ⑨ 사회여건

2 항만시설에 관한 세부요소인 e-RTGC AMP AGV 중 어느 항목이 상대적으로 더

중요한지 평가해 주시기 바랍니다 보기를 참조하여 아래 분항에 ldquoradic rdquo 표기하여

주시기 바랍니다 (반드시 한 칸에만 ldquoradicrdquo 표시하여 주시기 바랍니다)

평가속성

절

대

중

요

매

우

중

요

중

요

약

간

중

요

동

일

약

간

중

요

중

요

매

우

중

요

절

대

중

요

평가속성

e-RTGC ⑨ ⑧ ⑦ ⑥ ⑤ ④ ③ ② ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥ ⑦ ⑧ ⑨ AMP

e-RTGC ⑨ ⑧ ⑦ ⑥ ⑤ ④ ③ ② ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥ ⑦ ⑧ ⑨ AGV

AMP ⑨ ⑧ ⑦ ⑥ ⑤ ④ ③ ② ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥ ⑦ ⑧ ⑨ AGV

3 항만비용에 관한 세부요소인 그린선박 인증제도 친환경기술 인센티브

속도감소할인제도 중 어느 항목이 상대적으로 더 중요한지 평가해 주시기

바랍니다보기를 참조하여 아래 분항에 ldquoradic rdquo 표기하여 주시기 바랍니다 (반드시 한

칸에만 ldquoradicrdquo 표시하여 주시기 바랍니다)

평가속성

절

대

중

요

매

우

중

요

중

요

약

간

중

요

동

일

약

간

중

요

중

요

매

우

중

요

절

대

중

요

평가속성

그린선박

인증제도 ⑨ ⑧ ⑦ ⑥ ⑤ ④ ③ ② ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥ ⑦ ⑧ ⑨

친환경기술

인센티브

그린선박

인증제도

속도감소

할인제도

친환경기술

인센티브

속도감소

할인제도

59

4 배후연계에 관한 세부요소인 친환경 운송수단 전환 공동수배송 중 어느

항목이 상대적으로 더 중요한지 평가해 주시기 바랍니다보기를 참조하여 아래

분항에 ldquoradic rdquo 표기하여 주시기 바랍니다 (반드시 한 칸에만 ldquoradicrdquo

표시하여 주시기 바랍니다)

평가속성

절

대

중

요

매

우

중

요

중

요

약

간

중

요

동

일

약

간

중

요

중

요

매

우

중

요

절

대

중

요

평가속성

친환경

운송수단

전환

⑨ ⑧ ⑦ ⑥ ⑤ ④ ③ ② ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥ ⑦ ⑧ ⑨ 공동수배송

5 사회여건에 관한 세부요소인 항만내 친수공간 조성계획 CO2 배출량 비용 CO2

배출량 감축 정책 중 어느 항목이 상대적으로 더 중요한지 평가해 주시기

바랍니다보기를 참조하여 아래 분항에 ldquoradic rdquo 표기하여 주시기 바랍니다 (반드시 한

칸에만 ldquoradicrdquo 표시하여 주시기 바랍니다)

평가속성

절

대

중

요

매

우

중

요

중

요

약

간

중

요

동

일

약

간

중

요

중

요

매

우

중

요

절

대

중

요

평가속성

항항만만내내

친친수수공공간간

조조성성계계획획

⑨ ⑧ ⑦ ⑥ ⑤ ④ ③ ② ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥ ⑦ ⑧ ⑨

CO2 배출량

비용

항항만만내내

친친수수공공간간

조조성성계계획획

CO2 배출량

감축 정책

CO2 배출량

비용

CO2 배출량

감축 정책

60

6 현시점에서의 그린포트 구축 상황을 고려하여 그린포트에 의한 항만의 경쟁력

요소에 따라 각 항만 갂의 경쟁력을 평가해 주시기 바랍니다 (해당 항만에 대하여

느껴지시는 정도에 따라서 해당하는 점수(5-1 사이)를 ( )안에 매겨 주시면 됩니다)

예

시

매우 좋다 좋다 보통 이다 안좋다 매우

안좋다

⑤

④

③

②

①

싱가포르 상하이 홍콩 부산 LALB 로테르담 요코하마

항만

시설 ( 4 ) ( 4 ) ( 3 ) ( 4 ) ( 3 ) ( 5 ) ( 5 )

평가속성 싱가포르 상하이 홍콩 부산 LALB 로테르담 요코하마

항만시설 ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

항만비용 ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

배후연계 ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

사회여건 ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

감사드립니다

• Chapter 1 Introduction
• • 11 Research background and objective
  • 12 Scope and structure of research
  • • Chapter 2 Green Port Construction Situation
    • • 21 Green Port Construction Background
      • 22 The Definition of Green Port
      • 23 Green Port Construction Situation in major countries
      • 24 Green Port Indicators Research
      • • Chapter 3 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and
        • • 31 Port Competitiveness Literature Review
          • 32 Port Competitiveness Development Tree
          • 33 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green
          • • Chapter 4 The Green Port Competitiveness Analysis
            • • 41 The Green Port Competitiveness Model by AHP
              • 42 Green Port Competitiveness Analysis
              • 43 Results Analysis
              • • Chapter 5 Conclusion
                • References

                • ltstartpagegt13Chapter 1 Introduction 1 11 Research background and objective 1 12 Scope and structure of research 3Chapter 2 Green Port Construction Situation 6 21 Green Port Construction Background 6 22 The Definition of Green Port 9 23 Green Port Construction Situation in major countries 12 24 Green Port Indicators Research 22Chapter 3 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and 24 31 Port Competitiveness Literature Review 24 32 Port Competitiveness Development Tree 30 33 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green 32Chapter 4 The Green Port Competitiveness Analysis 36 41 The Green Port Competitiveness Model by AHP 36 42 Green Port Competitiveness Analysis 38 43 Results Analysis 47Chapter 5 Conclusion 49References 51ltbodygt

57

공동수배송

각 개별 화주가 수송하는 방식에서 화주 또는

트럭운송업자가 공동으로 통합 적재 수송하는 방식으로

전환하여 수송비 절감 차량의 적재효율의 향상 공차율의

감소 CO2 배출량 감소 등을 도모하는 시스템

사회

여건

항만내 친수공간

조성계획

항만의 수변공간을 활용한 수변공원 야외무대 파고라 및

벤치 등의 휴게시설과 거주민을 위한 커뮤니티공간의

조성을 행하고 관광객을 유치하는 등 각 항만의 지역적인

특색을 고려한 친수공간 조성계획

CO2

배출량 비용

각 국가별 및 산업별 CO2 배출량에 대한 환산 비용(예

배출권 거래제)

CO2 배출량

감축 정책

기후변화협약 및 교토의정서에 대한 각 국가들은 CO2

배출량 감축 정책 및 항만에서의 구체적인 추진 정책

그린포트에 의한 항만경쟁력 평가모델에 관한 설문 내용

1 현재 그린포트에 의한 항만경쟁력을 평가에서 항만시설 항만서비스 항만비용

입출항 요소 배후연계 사회여건에 대한 상대적인 중요도를 평가해 주시기 바랍니다

보기를 참조하여 아래 분항에 ldquoradic rdquo 표기하여 주시기 바랍니다 (반드시 한 칸에만

ldquoradicrdquo 표시하여 주시기 바랍니다)

평가속성

절

대

중

요

매

우

중

요

중

요

약

간

중

요

동

일

약

간

중

요

중

요

매

우

중

요

절

대

중

요

평가속성

항만시설 ⑨ ⑧ ⑦ ⑥ ⑤ ④ ③ ② ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥ ⑦ ⑧ ⑨ 항만비용

항만시설 ⑨ ⑧ ⑦ ⑥ ⑤ ④ ③ ② ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥ ⑦ ⑧ ⑨ 배후연계

항만시설 ⑨ ⑧ ⑦ ⑥ ⑤ ④ ③ ② ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥ ⑦ ⑧ ⑨ 사회여건

항만비용 ⑨ ⑧ ⑦ ⑥ ⑤ ④ ③ ② ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥ ⑦ ⑧ ⑨ 배후연계

항만비용 ⑨ ⑧ ⑦ ⑥ ⑤ ④ ③ ② ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥ ⑦ ⑧ ⑨ 사회여건

58

배후연계 ⑨ ⑧ ⑦ ⑥ ⑤ ④ ③ ② ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥ ⑦ ⑧ ⑨ 사회여건

2 항만시설에 관한 세부요소인 e-RTGC AMP AGV 중 어느 항목이 상대적으로 더

중요한지 평가해 주시기 바랍니다 보기를 참조하여 아래 분항에 ldquoradic rdquo 표기하여

주시기 바랍니다 (반드시 한 칸에만 ldquoradicrdquo 표시하여 주시기 바랍니다)

평가속성

절

대

중

요

매

우

중

요

중

요

약

간

중

요

동

일

약

간

중

요

중

요

매

우

중

요

절

대

중

요

평가속성

e-RTGC ⑨ ⑧ ⑦ ⑥ ⑤ ④ ③ ② ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥ ⑦ ⑧ ⑨ AMP

e-RTGC ⑨ ⑧ ⑦ ⑥ ⑤ ④ ③ ② ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥ ⑦ ⑧ ⑨ AGV

AMP ⑨ ⑧ ⑦ ⑥ ⑤ ④ ③ ② ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥ ⑦ ⑧ ⑨ AGV

3 항만비용에 관한 세부요소인 그린선박 인증제도 친환경기술 인센티브

속도감소할인제도 중 어느 항목이 상대적으로 더 중요한지 평가해 주시기

바랍니다보기를 참조하여 아래 분항에 ldquoradic rdquo 표기하여 주시기 바랍니다 (반드시 한

칸에만 ldquoradicrdquo 표시하여 주시기 바랍니다)

평가속성

절

대

중

요

매

우

중

요

중

요

약

간

중

요

동

일

약

간

중

요

중

요

매

우

중

요

절

대

중

요

평가속성

그린선박

인증제도 ⑨ ⑧ ⑦ ⑥ ⑤ ④ ③ ② ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥ ⑦ ⑧ ⑨

친환경기술

인센티브

그린선박

인증제도

속도감소

할인제도

친환경기술

인센티브

속도감소

할인제도

59

4 배후연계에 관한 세부요소인 친환경 운송수단 전환 공동수배송 중 어느

항목이 상대적으로 더 중요한지 평가해 주시기 바랍니다보기를 참조하여 아래

분항에 ldquoradic rdquo 표기하여 주시기 바랍니다 (반드시 한 칸에만 ldquoradicrdquo

표시하여 주시기 바랍니다)

평가속성

절

대

중

요

매

우

중

요

중

요

약

간

중

요

동

일

약

간

중

요

중

요

매

우

중

요

절

대

중

요

평가속성

친환경

운송수단

전환

⑨ ⑧ ⑦ ⑥ ⑤ ④ ③ ② ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥ ⑦ ⑧ ⑨ 공동수배송

5 사회여건에 관한 세부요소인 항만내 친수공간 조성계획 CO2 배출량 비용 CO2

배출량 감축 정책 중 어느 항목이 상대적으로 더 중요한지 평가해 주시기

바랍니다보기를 참조하여 아래 분항에 ldquoradic rdquo 표기하여 주시기 바랍니다 (반드시 한

칸에만 ldquoradicrdquo 표시하여 주시기 바랍니다)

평가속성

절

대

중

요

매

우

중

요

중

요

약

간

중

요

동

일

약

간

중

요

중

요

매

우

중

요

절

대

중

요

평가속성

항항만만내내

친친수수공공간간

조조성성계계획획

⑨ ⑧ ⑦ ⑥ ⑤ ④ ③ ② ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥ ⑦ ⑧ ⑨

CO2 배출량

비용

항항만만내내

친친수수공공간간

조조성성계계획획

CO2 배출량

감축 정책

CO2 배출량

비용

CO2 배출량

감축 정책

60

6 현시점에서의 그린포트 구축 상황을 고려하여 그린포트에 의한 항만의 경쟁력

요소에 따라 각 항만 갂의 경쟁력을 평가해 주시기 바랍니다 (해당 항만에 대하여

느껴지시는 정도에 따라서 해당하는 점수(5-1 사이)를 ( )안에 매겨 주시면 됩니다)

예

시

매우 좋다 좋다 보통 이다 안좋다 매우

안좋다

⑤

④

③

②

①

싱가포르 상하이 홍콩 부산 LALB 로테르담 요코하마

항만

시설 ( 4 ) ( 4 ) ( 3 ) ( 4 ) ( 3 ) ( 5 ) ( 5 )

평가속성 싱가포르 상하이 홍콩 부산 LALB 로테르담 요코하마

항만시설 ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

항만비용 ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

배후연계 ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

사회여건 ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

감사드립니다

• Chapter 1 Introduction
• • 11 Research background and objective
  • 12 Scope and structure of research
  • • Chapter 2 Green Port Construction Situation
    • • 21 Green Port Construction Background
      • 22 The Definition of Green Port
      • 23 Green Port Construction Situation in major countries
      • 24 Green Port Indicators Research
      • • Chapter 3 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and
        • • 31 Port Competitiveness Literature Review
          • 32 Port Competitiveness Development Tree
          • 33 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green
          • • Chapter 4 The Green Port Competitiveness Analysis
            • • 41 The Green Port Competitiveness Model by AHP
              • 42 Green Port Competitiveness Analysis
              • 43 Results Analysis
              • • Chapter 5 Conclusion
                • References

                • ltstartpagegt13Chapter 1 Introduction 1 11 Research background and objective 1 12 Scope and structure of research 3Chapter 2 Green Port Construction Situation 6 21 Green Port Construction Background 6 22 The Definition of Green Port 9 23 Green Port Construction Situation in major countries 12 24 Green Port Indicators Research 22Chapter 3 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and 24 31 Port Competitiveness Literature Review 24 32 Port Competitiveness Development Tree 30 33 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green 32Chapter 4 The Green Port Competitiveness Analysis 36 41 The Green Port Competitiveness Model by AHP 36 42 Green Port Competitiveness Analysis 38 43 Results Analysis 47Chapter 5 Conclusion 49References 51ltbodygt

58

배후연계 ⑨ ⑧ ⑦ ⑥ ⑤ ④ ③ ② ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥ ⑦ ⑧ ⑨ 사회여건

2 항만시설에 관한 세부요소인 e-RTGC AMP AGV 중 어느 항목이 상대적으로 더

중요한지 평가해 주시기 바랍니다 보기를 참조하여 아래 분항에 ldquoradic rdquo 표기하여

주시기 바랍니다 (반드시 한 칸에만 ldquoradicrdquo 표시하여 주시기 바랍니다)

평가속성

절

대

중

요

매

우

중

요

중

요

약

간

중

요

동

일

약

간

중

요

중

요

매

우

중

요

절

대

중

요

평가속성

e-RTGC ⑨ ⑧ ⑦ ⑥ ⑤ ④ ③ ② ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥ ⑦ ⑧ ⑨ AMP

e-RTGC ⑨ ⑧ ⑦ ⑥ ⑤ ④ ③ ② ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥ ⑦ ⑧ ⑨ AGV

AMP ⑨ ⑧ ⑦ ⑥ ⑤ ④ ③ ② ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥ ⑦ ⑧ ⑨ AGV

3 항만비용에 관한 세부요소인 그린선박 인증제도 친환경기술 인센티브

속도감소할인제도 중 어느 항목이 상대적으로 더 중요한지 평가해 주시기

바랍니다보기를 참조하여 아래 분항에 ldquoradic rdquo 표기하여 주시기 바랍니다 (반드시 한

칸에만 ldquoradicrdquo 표시하여 주시기 바랍니다)

평가속성

절

대

중

요

매

우

중

요

중

요

약

간

중

요

동

일

약

간

중

요

중

요

매

우

중

요

절

대

중

요

평가속성

그린선박

인증제도 ⑨ ⑧ ⑦ ⑥ ⑤ ④ ③ ② ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥ ⑦ ⑧ ⑨

친환경기술

인센티브

그린선박

인증제도

속도감소

할인제도

친환경기술

인센티브

속도감소

할인제도

59

4 배후연계에 관한 세부요소인 친환경 운송수단 전환 공동수배송 중 어느

항목이 상대적으로 더 중요한지 평가해 주시기 바랍니다보기를 참조하여 아래

분항에 ldquoradic rdquo 표기하여 주시기 바랍니다 (반드시 한 칸에만 ldquoradicrdquo

표시하여 주시기 바랍니다)

평가속성

절

대

중

요

매

우

중

요

중

요

약

간

중

요

동

일

약

간

중

요

중

요

매

우

중

요

절

대

중

요

평가속성

친환경

운송수단

전환

⑨ ⑧ ⑦ ⑥ ⑤ ④ ③ ② ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥ ⑦ ⑧ ⑨ 공동수배송

5 사회여건에 관한 세부요소인 항만내 친수공간 조성계획 CO2 배출량 비용 CO2

배출량 감축 정책 중 어느 항목이 상대적으로 더 중요한지 평가해 주시기

바랍니다보기를 참조하여 아래 분항에 ldquoradic rdquo 표기하여 주시기 바랍니다 (반드시 한

칸에만 ldquoradicrdquo 표시하여 주시기 바랍니다)

평가속성

절

대

중

요

매

우

중

요

중

요

약

간

중

요

동

일

약

간

중

요

중

요

매

우

중

요

절

대

중

요

평가속성

항항만만내내

친친수수공공간간

조조성성계계획획

⑨ ⑧ ⑦ ⑥ ⑤ ④ ③ ② ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥ ⑦ ⑧ ⑨

CO2 배출량

비용

항항만만내내

친친수수공공간간

조조성성계계획획

CO2 배출량

감축 정책

CO2 배출량

비용

CO2 배출량

감축 정책

60

6 현시점에서의 그린포트 구축 상황을 고려하여 그린포트에 의한 항만의 경쟁력

요소에 따라 각 항만 갂의 경쟁력을 평가해 주시기 바랍니다 (해당 항만에 대하여

느껴지시는 정도에 따라서 해당하는 점수(5-1 사이)를 ( )안에 매겨 주시면 됩니다)

예

시

매우 좋다 좋다 보통 이다 안좋다 매우

안좋다

⑤

④

③

②

①

싱가포르 상하이 홍콩 부산 LALB 로테르담 요코하마

항만

시설 ( 4 ) ( 4 ) ( 3 ) ( 4 ) ( 3 ) ( 5 ) ( 5 )

평가속성 싱가포르 상하이 홍콩 부산 LALB 로테르담 요코하마

항만시설 ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

항만비용 ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

배후연계 ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

사회여건 ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

감사드립니다

• Chapter 1 Introduction
• • 11 Research background and objective
  • 12 Scope and structure of research
  • • Chapter 2 Green Port Construction Situation
    • • 21 Green Port Construction Background
      • 22 The Definition of Green Port
      • 23 Green Port Construction Situation in major countries
      • 24 Green Port Indicators Research
      • • Chapter 3 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and
        • • 31 Port Competitiveness Literature Review
          • 32 Port Competitiveness Development Tree
          • 33 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green
          • • Chapter 4 The Green Port Competitiveness Analysis
            • • 41 The Green Port Competitiveness Model by AHP
              • 42 Green Port Competitiveness Analysis
              • 43 Results Analysis
              • • Chapter 5 Conclusion
                • References

                • ltstartpagegt13Chapter 1 Introduction 1 11 Research background and objective 1 12 Scope and structure of research 3Chapter 2 Green Port Construction Situation 6 21 Green Port Construction Background 6 22 The Definition of Green Port 9 23 Green Port Construction Situation in major countries 12 24 Green Port Indicators Research 22Chapter 3 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and 24 31 Port Competitiveness Literature Review 24 32 Port Competitiveness Development Tree 30 33 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green 32Chapter 4 The Green Port Competitiveness Analysis 36 41 The Green Port Competitiveness Model by AHP 36 42 Green Port Competitiveness Analysis 38 43 Results Analysis 47Chapter 5 Conclusion 49References 51ltbodygt

59

4 배후연계에 관한 세부요소인 친환경 운송수단 전환 공동수배송 중 어느

항목이 상대적으로 더 중요한지 평가해 주시기 바랍니다보기를 참조하여 아래

분항에 ldquoradic rdquo 표기하여 주시기 바랍니다 (반드시 한 칸에만 ldquoradicrdquo

표시하여 주시기 바랍니다)

평가속성

절

대

중

요

매

우

중

요

중

요

약

간

중

요

동

일

약

간

중

요

중

요

매

우

중

요

절

대

중

요

평가속성

친환경

운송수단

전환

⑨ ⑧ ⑦ ⑥ ⑤ ④ ③ ② ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥ ⑦ ⑧ ⑨ 공동수배송

5 사회여건에 관한 세부요소인 항만내 친수공간 조성계획 CO2 배출량 비용 CO2

배출량 감축 정책 중 어느 항목이 상대적으로 더 중요한지 평가해 주시기

바랍니다보기를 참조하여 아래 분항에 ldquoradic rdquo 표기하여 주시기 바랍니다 (반드시 한

칸에만 ldquoradicrdquo 표시하여 주시기 바랍니다)

평가속성

절

대

중

요

매

우

중

요

중

요

약

간

중

요

동

일

약

간

중

요

중

요

매

우

중

요

절

대

중

요

평가속성

항항만만내내

친친수수공공간간

조조성성계계획획

⑨ ⑧ ⑦ ⑥ ⑤ ④ ③ ② ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥ ⑦ ⑧ ⑨

CO2 배출량

비용

항항만만내내

친친수수공공간간

조조성성계계획획

CO2 배출량

감축 정책

CO2 배출량

비용

CO2 배출량

감축 정책

60

6 현시점에서의 그린포트 구축 상황을 고려하여 그린포트에 의한 항만의 경쟁력

요소에 따라 각 항만 갂의 경쟁력을 평가해 주시기 바랍니다 (해당 항만에 대하여

느껴지시는 정도에 따라서 해당하는 점수(5-1 사이)를 ( )안에 매겨 주시면 됩니다)

예

시

매우 좋다 좋다 보통 이다 안좋다 매우

안좋다

⑤

④

③

②

①

싱가포르 상하이 홍콩 부산 LALB 로테르담 요코하마

항만

시설 ( 4 ) ( 4 ) ( 3 ) ( 4 ) ( 3 ) ( 5 ) ( 5 )

평가속성 싱가포르 상하이 홍콩 부산 LALB 로테르담 요코하마

항만시설 ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

항만비용 ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

배후연계 ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

사회여건 ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

감사드립니다

• Chapter 1 Introduction
• • 11 Research background and objective
  • 12 Scope and structure of research
  • • Chapter 2 Green Port Construction Situation
    • • 21 Green Port Construction Background
      • 22 The Definition of Green Port
      • 23 Green Port Construction Situation in major countries
      • 24 Green Port Indicators Research
      • • Chapter 3 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and
        • • 31 Port Competitiveness Literature Review
          • 32 Port Competitiveness Development Tree
          • 33 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green
          • • Chapter 4 The Green Port Competitiveness Analysis
            • • 41 The Green Port Competitiveness Model by AHP
              • 42 Green Port Competitiveness Analysis
              • 43 Results Analysis
              • • Chapter 5 Conclusion
                • References

                • ltstartpagegt13Chapter 1 Introduction 1 11 Research background and objective 1 12 Scope and structure of research 3Chapter 2 Green Port Construction Situation 6 21 Green Port Construction Background 6 22 The Definition of Green Port 9 23 Green Port Construction Situation in major countries 12 24 Green Port Indicators Research 22Chapter 3 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and 24 31 Port Competitiveness Literature Review 24 32 Port Competitiveness Development Tree 30 33 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green 32Chapter 4 The Green Port Competitiveness Analysis 36 41 The Green Port Competitiveness Model by AHP 36 42 Green Port Competitiveness Analysis 38 43 Results Analysis 47Chapter 5 Conclusion 49References 51ltbodygt

60

6 현시점에서의 그린포트 구축 상황을 고려하여 그린포트에 의한 항만의 경쟁력

요소에 따라 각 항만 갂의 경쟁력을 평가해 주시기 바랍니다 (해당 항만에 대하여

느껴지시는 정도에 따라서 해당하는 점수(5-1 사이)를 ( )안에 매겨 주시면 됩니다)

예

시

매우 좋다 좋다 보통 이다 안좋다 매우

안좋다

⑤

④

③

②

①

싱가포르 상하이 홍콩 부산 LALB 로테르담 요코하마

항만

시설 ( 4 ) ( 4 ) ( 3 ) ( 4 ) ( 3 ) ( 5 ) ( 5 )

평가속성 싱가포르 상하이 홍콩 부산 LALB 로테르담 요코하마

항만시설 ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

항만비용 ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

배후연계 ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

사회여건 ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

감사드립니다

• Chapter 1 Introduction
• • 11 Research background and objective
  • 12 Scope and structure of research
  • • Chapter 2 Green Port Construction Situation
    • • 21 Green Port Construction Background
      • 22 The Definition of Green Port
      • 23 Green Port Construction Situation in major countries
      • 24 Green Port Indicators Research
      • • Chapter 3 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and
        • • 31 Port Competitiveness Literature Review
          • 32 Port Competitiveness Development Tree
          • 33 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green
          • • Chapter 4 The Green Port Competitiveness Analysis
            • • 41 The Green Port Competitiveness Model by AHP
              • 42 Green Port Competitiveness Analysis
              • 43 Results Analysis
              • • Chapter 5 Conclusion
                • References

                • ltstartpagegt13Chapter 1 Introduction 1 11 Research background and objective 1 12 Scope and structure of research 3Chapter 2 Green Port Construction Situation 6 21 Green Port Construction Background 6 22 The Definition of Green Port 9 23 Green Port Construction Situation in major countries 12 24 Green Port Indicators Research 22Chapter 3 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and 24 31 Port Competitiveness Literature Review 24 32 Port Competitiveness Development Tree 30 33 The Relationship between Port Competitiveness and Green 32Chapter 4 The Green Port Competitiveness Analysis 36 41 The Green Port Competitiveness Model by AHP 36 42 Green Port Competitiveness Analysis 38 43 Results Analysis 47Chapter 5 Conclusion 49References 51ltbodygt